Heuristic Evaluation of Play4Fit Health and Fitness App: A Comparison Between Experts and Novices Evaluators

Pub Date : 2023-07-12 DOI:10.5614/j.vad.2023.15.1.2
M. K. Othman, Nur Diyana Rahman
{"title":"Heuristic Evaluation of Play4Fit Health and Fitness App: A Comparison Between Experts and Novices Evaluators","authors":"M. K. Othman, Nur Diyana Rahman","doi":"10.5614/j.vad.2023.15.1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Heuristic evaluation (HE) can be used to effectively identify usability issues in various interfaces. However, it has not been widely used in evaluating smartphone apps, especially in the health and fitness domain. One reason is the lack of HCI experts, which makes incorporating HE into the design process difficult. This paper presents the results of a study that compared HE performed by three HCI experts and three novices in evaluating a gamification app for health and fitness on a smartphone. The study used Smartphone Mobile Application heuRisTics (SMART), which focuses on smartphone apps, and a severity rating scale to determine the severity of the usability issues. These issues were mapped to the SMART heuristic. The findings indicate that novices may identify usability issues that the experts overlooked. While the experts identified eighteen usability issues, the novices found only four; however, the novice’s findings may be used as a substitute for HE when experts are unavailable. Both experts and novices identified two similar usability issues, but their severity ratings differed. One possible solution to address the lack of usability issues identified by novices in HE is to use more novices instead of experts in the evaluation process.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5614/j.vad.2023.15.1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Heuristic evaluation (HE) can be used to effectively identify usability issues in various interfaces. However, it has not been widely used in evaluating smartphone apps, especially in the health and fitness domain. One reason is the lack of HCI experts, which makes incorporating HE into the design process difficult. This paper presents the results of a study that compared HE performed by three HCI experts and three novices in evaluating a gamification app for health and fitness on a smartphone. The study used Smartphone Mobile Application heuRisTics (SMART), which focuses on smartphone apps, and a severity rating scale to determine the severity of the usability issues. These issues were mapped to the SMART heuristic. The findings indicate that novices may identify usability issues that the experts overlooked. While the experts identified eighteen usability issues, the novices found only four; however, the novice’s findings may be used as a substitute for HE when experts are unavailable. Both experts and novices identified two similar usability issues, but their severity ratings differed. One possible solution to address the lack of usability issues identified by novices in HE is to use more novices instead of experts in the evaluation process.
分享
查看原文
Play4Fit健康健身应用程序的启发式评估:专家和新手评估者的比较
启发式评估(HE)可以用来有效地识别各种接口中的可用性问题。然而,它并没有被广泛用于评估智能手机应用程序,尤其是在健康和健身领域。其中一个原因是缺乏HCI专家,这使得将HE纳入设计过程变得困难。本文介绍了一项研究的结果,该研究比较了三位HCI专家和三位新手在智能手机上评估健康和健身游戏化应用程序时进行的HE测试。这项研究使用了专注于智能手机应用程序的智能手机移动应用程序heuRisTics(SMART)和严重性评级量表来确定可用性问题的严重性。这些问题被映射到SMART启发式。研究结果表明,新手可能会发现专家忽视的可用性问题。虽然专家们发现了18个可用性问题,但新手们只发现了4个;然而,当专家不在时,新手的发现可以作为HE的替代品。专家和新手都发现了两个类似的可用性问题,但它们的严重性评级不同。解决高等教育新手发现的可用性不足问题的一个可能的解决方案是在评估过程中使用更多的新手而不是专家。
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
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信