skip to main content
10.1145/2662253.2662278acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesinteraccionConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

How to classify to experts in usability evaluation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:10 September 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

Usability inspections are a set of methods for evaluating one interactive system by experts. They try to find possible usability problems and determining the level of usability of the system without involving real users. One of these methods is heuristic evaluation, where several experts inspect one system or its interface for searching usability issues. Some authors maintain that evaluation by experts in usability discovers more usability issues than evaluation conducted by non-experts. But the question is how to determine the degree of expertise of an evaluator.

In this paper we will propose a classification of evaluators based on the university degree obtained or the number of hours of practice gathered in this field. One user could be classified as expert depending on his/her professional career and not only by university degrees. This is why it is important to collect other attributes of each user like domains, skills or projects to determine their expertise. We finally present how to validate these attributes by other users of the proposed repository.

References

  1. Beyer, H., Holtzblatt, K., 1998. Contextual Design-Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Constantine, L. L., Lockwood, L. A. 1999. Software for Use- A Practical Guide to the models and methods of Usage-Centered Design. Addison-Wesley Professional. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Computer Science Curricula 2013 http://www.acm.org/education/CS2013-final-report.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Dreyfus, H. & Dreyfus, S. 2005. Peripheral vision expertise in real world contexts. Organization studies, 26, 5, 779--792.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ericsson, K. A. 2008. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine : Official Journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 15, 11, 988--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Farrel, S., Nielsen, J. 2013. Users experience Careers, How to Become a UX Pro, and How to hire one, Nielsen Norman Group http://www nngroup.com/reports/user-experience-careers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Gladwell, M. 2008. Outliers: The Story of Success. Little, Brown and Company. New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Graduate Degrees in Software Ergonomics at Human Factors International https://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/degrees.aspGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Gulliksen, J., Boivie, I. and Göransson, B. 2006. Usability professionals-current practices and future development. Interacting with Computers. 18, 4 (July 2006), 568--600. DOI=10.1016/j.intcom.2005.10.005 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Human Computer Interaction Beta. http://hcicourse.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Human-Computer Interaction Standford Online. http://online.stanford.edu/course/hciGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO 9241-11. 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) Part 11: Guidance on Usability. ISOGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. ISO/IEC 25010:2011. 2011. System and Software Engineering - Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - System and Software Quality ModelsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Nielsen, J. 1993. What is usability? In: What is Usability Engineering. Cambridge MA: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Online User eXperience Institute. http://www.ouxinstitute.com/Curriculum/CourseList/index.phpGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Schaffer, E. 2004. Institutionalization of usability: a step-by-step guide. Addison-Wesley Professional. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Shackel, B., 1981. The concept of usability. Proceedings of IBM software and information usability symposium, Poughkeepsie, NY, 15-18 September, 1-30Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Shanteau, J., Weiss, D. J., Thomas, R. P., & Pounds, J. C. 2002. Performance-based assessment of expertise: How to decide if someone is an expert or not. European Journal of Operational Research, 136, 2, 253--263.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Simon, H. A., & Gilmartin, K. 1973. A simulation of memory for chess positions. Cognitive psychology, 5, 1, 29--46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Spanish Association Interacción-Persona Ordenador. http://www.aipo.esGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. User Experience Professionals Association. https://uxpa.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. How to classify to experts in usability evaluation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      Interacción '14: Proceedings of the XV International Conference on Human Computer Interaction
      September 2014
      435 pages
      ISBN:9781450328807
      DOI:10.1145/2662253

      Copyright © 2014 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 10 September 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate109of163submissions,67%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader