评估界面的综合方法

Heather L. McQuaid, David Bishop
{"title":"评估界面的综合方法","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。
An integrated method for evaluating interfaces
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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