Lessons learned from evaluating a mobile app out in the field

Kelly McDonald, W. Abell, Carol Smith, S. Gibbs
{"title":"Lessons learned from evaluating a mobile app out in the field","authors":"Kelly McDonald, W. Abell, Carol Smith, S. Gibbs","doi":"10.1109/IUSER.2016.7857925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an ideal world every application, web page or system developed would undergo an iterative series of interface and usability evaluations. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and often limited testing occurs. Coupled with this is the rapid development of mobile applications for use in many areas. Often these are developed very quickly and, given consideration when developing this type of device, care needs to be taken in evaluating them at each stage. This paper reflects on the lessons learned from only carrying out a user evaluation and no interface evaluation of a mobile application developed for use by soil scientists in the field. The application, provisionally named iPed (Information for Profile Description), was developed in response to the need for an easy and effective method for entering data in the field which would eliminate the requirement of taking many references book and also remove double handling of data entry. A combination of in-lab and in-field evaluations were undertaken to test the effectiveness of this method of data entry with soil science students in the natural environment of a soil pit. Despite the effects of the weather on the readability of the screen, preliminary evidence suggests that participants much preferred the mobile method to the traditional paper based method. However, several interface problems discovered in this evaluation may have been able to be remedied had an interface evaluation been carried out prior to the user evaluation. The resulting lessons learned from the evaluation carried on iPed highlight the benefits of expert evaluations undertaken during development and that, generally users are resilient and will “make do” if required.","PeriodicalId":387278,"journal":{"name":"2016 4th International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr)","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 4th International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IUSER.2016.7857925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In an ideal world every application, web page or system developed would undergo an iterative series of interface and usability evaluations. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and often limited testing occurs. Coupled with this is the rapid development of mobile applications for use in many areas. Often these are developed very quickly and, given consideration when developing this type of device, care needs to be taken in evaluating them at each stage. This paper reflects on the lessons learned from only carrying out a user evaluation and no interface evaluation of a mobile application developed for use by soil scientists in the field. The application, provisionally named iPed (Information for Profile Description), was developed in response to the need for an easy and effective method for entering data in the field which would eliminate the requirement of taking many references book and also remove double handling of data entry. A combination of in-lab and in-field evaluations were undertaken to test the effectiveness of this method of data entry with soil science students in the natural environment of a soil pit. Despite the effects of the weather on the readability of the screen, preliminary evidence suggests that participants much preferred the mobile method to the traditional paper based method. However, several interface problems discovered in this evaluation may have been able to be remedied had an interface evaluation been carried out prior to the user evaluation. The resulting lessons learned from the evaluation carried on iPed highlight the benefits of expert evaluations undertaken during development and that, generally users are resilient and will “make do” if required.
从实地评估手机应用中学到的经验教训
在理想情况下,开发的每个应用程序、网页或系统都要经过一系列的界面和可用性评估。不幸的是,我们并不生活在一个理想的世界里,经常会发生有限的测试。与此相结合的是移动应用程序在许多领域的快速发展。这些通常发展得非常快,在开发这种类型的设备时,需要注意在每个阶段对它们进行评估。本文反映了仅对该领域土壤科学家使用的移动应用程序进行用户评估而没有进行界面评估的经验教训。这个应用程序,暂时命名为iPed(信息配置文件描述),是为了响应在字段中输入数据的简单有效的方法的需要而开发的,这将消除带许多参考书的要求,也消除了数据输入的双重处理。结合实验室和现场评估,在土壤坑的自然环境中与土壤科学专业的学生一起测试这种数据输入方法的有效性。尽管天气对屏幕的可读性有影响,但初步证据表明,参与者更喜欢移动方法而不是传统的基于纸张的方法。然而,如果在用户评估之前进行界面评估,则在此评估中发现的几个界面问题可能已经能够得到补救。从国际环境规划署进行的评价中吸取的经验教训突出了在开发期间进行专家评价的好处,而且一般来说,用户是有弹性的,如果需要,他们会“将就”。
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