An integrated method for evaluating interfaces

Heather L. McQuaid, David Bishop
{"title":"An integrated method for evaluating interfaces","authors":"Heather L. McQuaid, David Bishop","doi":"10.1145/634067.634237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To take advantage of the interdisciplinary experience of our colleagues, we decided several years ago to add heuristic evaluation to our expert analysis method. Although heuristic evaluation is a cost-effective method for evaluating interfaces, we found that the recommended prioritization strategy--ranking the problems according to severity--has several limitations. Specifically, it does not address how much it will cost the developers to fix the problems, nor does it adequately capture the distinction between high-level (global) and low-level (specific, screen-level) problems. To address these limitations, we developed a method which retains the richness of heuristic evaluation, but communicates the results in such a way that project managers, developers, and designers can form a clear and immediately executable plan for addressing the problems. Our method integrates user research, heuristic evaluation, affinity diagramming, cost-benefit charts, and recommendations into a report that others can use to plan both short and long-term improvements.","PeriodicalId":351792,"journal":{"name":"CHI '01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHI '01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

To take advantage of the interdisciplinary experience of our colleagues, we decided several years ago to add heuristic evaluation to our expert analysis method. Although heuristic evaluation is a cost-effective method for evaluating interfaces, we found that the recommended prioritization strategy--ranking the problems according to severity--has several limitations. Specifically, it does not address how much it will cost the developers to fix the problems, nor does it adequately capture the distinction between high-level (global) and low-level (specific, screen-level) problems. To address these limitations, we developed a method which retains the richness of heuristic evaluation, but communicates the results in such a way that project managers, developers, and designers can form a clear and immediately executable plan for addressing the problems. Our method integrates user research, heuristic evaluation, affinity diagramming, cost-benefit charts, and recommendations into a report that others can use to plan both short and long-term improvements.
评估界面的综合方法
为了利用我们同事的跨学科经验,几年前我们决定在专家分析方法中加入启发式评估。尽管启发式评估是一种经济有效的界面评估方法,但我们发现所推荐的优先级排序策略--根据严重程度对问题进行排序--存在一些局限性。具体来说,它没有解决开发人员需要花费多少成本来解决这些问题的问题,也没有充分体现高层次(全局性)问题和低层次(具体的、屏幕级别的)问题之间的区别。为了解决这些局限性,我们开发了一种方法,它既保留了启发式评估的丰富内涵,又能将评估结果传达给项目经理、开发人员和设计人员,使他们能够为解决问题制定明确且可立即执行的计划。我们的方法将用户研究、启发式评估、亲和图、成本效益图和建议整合到一份报告中,其他人可以利用这份报告制定短期和长期的改进计划。
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