Use of usability evaluation methods in France: The reality in professional practices

Amelie Rache, V. Lespinet-Najib, J. André
{"title":"Use of usability evaluation methods in France: The reality in professional practices","authors":"Amelie Rache, V. Lespinet-Najib, J. André","doi":"10.1109/IUSER.2014.7002699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study is first, to have an overview of current professional practices related to the use of usability evaluation and conception methods (user testing, interview, etc.) of a human-machine interface (HMI); and then, to determine the factors influencing their use. For this purpose, we have developed an online survey aimed at professionals sensitive to usability issues. The survey was open for the last quarter of 2012; the final sample size was 98 professionals. The relevance of this questionnaire is to identify the level of knowledge and use for each usability method. Our study highlighted the following results: while some methods are frequently used, such as user testing; others are unknown to professionals, such as automated evaluation. Certain methods are known to professionals but used anecdotally, such as card sorting. The study also reveals some factors influencing how the use of each method is done. The results show that the use of each method depends on the professional's expertise, academic background and the sector in which they work. In a longer term, we want to conduct interviews with professionals to know about their practices in more detail. One of our final objectives is to provide an aid system to help designers to choose the best association of usability methods according to all of the contextual elements.","PeriodicalId":136616,"journal":{"name":"2014 3rd International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 3rd International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IUSER.2014.7002699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

The aim of this study is first, to have an overview of current professional practices related to the use of usability evaluation and conception methods (user testing, interview, etc.) of a human-machine interface (HMI); and then, to determine the factors influencing their use. For this purpose, we have developed an online survey aimed at professionals sensitive to usability issues. The survey was open for the last quarter of 2012; the final sample size was 98 professionals. The relevance of this questionnaire is to identify the level of knowledge and use for each usability method. Our study highlighted the following results: while some methods are frequently used, such as user testing; others are unknown to professionals, such as automated evaluation. Certain methods are known to professionals but used anecdotally, such as card sorting. The study also reveals some factors influencing how the use of each method is done. The results show that the use of each method depends on the professional's expertise, academic background and the sector in which they work. In a longer term, we want to conduct interviews with professionals to know about their practices in more detail. One of our final objectives is to provide an aid system to help designers to choose the best association of usability methods according to all of the contextual elements.
法国可用性评估方法的使用:专业实践中的现实
本研究的目的首先是概述当前与使用人机界面(HMI)可用性评估和概念方法(用户测试,访谈等)相关的专业实践;然后,确定影响其使用的因素。为此,我们开发了一项针对对可用性问题敏感的专业人士的在线调查。该调查于2012年最后一个季度开始;最终的样本量为98名专业人士。该问卷的相关性在于确定每个可用性方法的知识水平和使用情况。我们的研究强调了以下结果:虽然一些方法经常被使用,如用户测试;还有一些是专业人士所不知道的,比如自动评估。有些方法是专业人士知道的,但在坊间使用,比如卡片分类。该研究还揭示了影响每种方法使用方式的一些因素。结果表明,每种方法的使用取决于专业人员的专业知识、学术背景和他们工作的部门。从长远来看,我们希望与专业人士进行访谈,以更详细地了解他们的实践。我们的最终目标之一是提供一个辅助系统,帮助设计师根据所有上下文元素选择可用性方法的最佳关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信