启发式评估与认知演练的比较研究——以电子政务可用性评估为例

IF 2.6 4区 综合性期刊 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Asra Alshabib, Noor Alakkas, Jameleddine Hassine
{"title":"启发式评估与认知演练的比较研究——以电子政务可用性评估为例","authors":"Asra Alshabib,&nbsp;Noor Alakkas,&nbsp;Jameleddine Hassine","doi":"10.1007/s13369-025-09980-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ensuring usability is essential in software systems, and various testing methods are employed for this purpose. Expert-based inspection methods, like Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) and Heuristic Evaluation (HE), are widely used to identify usability issues. However, these methods can be time-consuming, highlighting the need to assess their effectiveness in usability evaluation. The objective of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of two expert-based usability evaluation methods, CW and HE, as applied to Absher’s website and mobile application, the most widely used governmental system in Saudi Arabia. Five independent evaluators applied these methods, and an in-depth comparison was made on the identified usability issues, their severity, and the corresponding usability attributes. HE identified a total of 83 issues, while CW identified 58, with HE being more effective at detecting major usability problems and CW excelling in identifying catastrophic issues. In terms of usability attributes, HE identified more issues related to effectiveness, efficiency, and errors, while CW detected a higher number of learnability problems. Both methods performed similarly in identifying memorability issues. This study offers insights into the strengths and limitations of both CW and HE, contributing valuable guidance on selecting the appropriate usability evaluation method based on the system’s context.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54354,"journal":{"name":"Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering","volume":"50 10","pages":"7801 - 7830"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study of Heuristic Evaluation and Cognitive Walkthrough: An E-Government Usability Assessment Case Study\",\"authors\":\"Asra Alshabib,&nbsp;Noor Alakkas,&nbsp;Jameleddine Hassine\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13369-025-09980-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Ensuring usability is essential in software systems, and various testing methods are employed for this purpose. Expert-based inspection methods, like Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) and Heuristic Evaluation (HE), are widely used to identify usability issues. However, these methods can be time-consuming, highlighting the need to assess their effectiveness in usability evaluation. The objective of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of two expert-based usability evaluation methods, CW and HE, as applied to Absher’s website and mobile application, the most widely used governmental system in Saudi Arabia. Five independent evaluators applied these methods, and an in-depth comparison was made on the identified usability issues, their severity, and the corresponding usability attributes. HE identified a total of 83 issues, while CW identified 58, with HE being more effective at detecting major usability problems and CW excelling in identifying catastrophic issues. In terms of usability attributes, HE identified more issues related to effectiveness, efficiency, and errors, while CW detected a higher number of learnability problems. Both methods performed similarly in identifying memorability issues. This study offers insights into the strengths and limitations of both CW and HE, contributing valuable guidance on selecting the appropriate usability evaluation method based on the system’s context.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering\",\"volume\":\"50 10\",\"pages\":\"7801 - 7830\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13369-025-09980-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13369-025-09980-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确保软件系统的可用性是必不可少的,为此目的采用了各种测试方法。基于专家的检查方法,如认知演练(CW)和启发式评估(HE),被广泛用于识别可用性问题。然而,这些方法可能是耗时的,突出了在可用性评估中评估其有效性的必要性。本研究的目的是对两种基于专家的可用性评估方法CW和HE进行比较分析,并将其应用于沙特阿拉伯最广泛使用的政府系统Absher的网站和移动应用程序。五个独立的评估者应用了这些方法,并对确定的可用性问题、其严重性和相应的可用性属性进行了深入的比较。HE总共发现了83个问题,而CW发现了58个,HE在发现主要可用性问题方面更有效,而CW在发现灾难性问题方面更出色。在可用性属性方面,HE发现了更多与有效性、效率和错误相关的问题,而CW发现了更多的可学习性问题。这两种方法在识别记忆问题方面表现相似。本研究提供了对CW和HE的优势和局限性的见解,为基于系统上下文选择合适的可用性评估方法提供了有价值的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Study of Heuristic Evaluation and Cognitive Walkthrough: An E-Government Usability Assessment Case Study

Ensuring usability is essential in software systems, and various testing methods are employed for this purpose. Expert-based inspection methods, like Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) and Heuristic Evaluation (HE), are widely used to identify usability issues. However, these methods can be time-consuming, highlighting the need to assess their effectiveness in usability evaluation. The objective of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of two expert-based usability evaluation methods, CW and HE, as applied to Absher’s website and mobile application, the most widely used governmental system in Saudi Arabia. Five independent evaluators applied these methods, and an in-depth comparison was made on the identified usability issues, their severity, and the corresponding usability attributes. HE identified a total of 83 issues, while CW identified 58, with HE being more effective at detecting major usability problems and CW excelling in identifying catastrophic issues. In terms of usability attributes, HE identified more issues related to effectiveness, efficiency, and errors, while CW detected a higher number of learnability problems. Both methods performed similarly in identifying memorability issues. This study offers insights into the strengths and limitations of both CW and HE, contributing valuable guidance on selecting the appropriate usability evaluation method based on the system’s context.

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
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.40%
发文量
993
期刊介绍: King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) partnered with Springer to publish the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE). AJSE, which has been published by KFUPM since 1975, is a recognized national, regional and international journal that provides a great opportunity for the dissemination of research advances from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, MENA and the world.
×
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