Upload
lucy-dingle
View
219
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Actionable Information:Tools and Techniques to Help
Design Effective Intranets
Frank CervoneAssistant University Librarian for Information TechnologyNorthwestern UniversityEvanston, IL, USA
Darlene FichterData Librarian
University of SaskatchewanSaskatoon, SK, Canada
Overview
• Why heuristics testing? • What is heuristics testing?• Heuristics applied to the web• Using heuristic testing for your
intranet
Why?• Will find 81%-90% of usability problems1
– Evaluators are experts in software ergonomy and in the field in which the software is applied.
• 22% to 29% of usability problems1
– Evaluators know nothing about usability
• Single evaluators found only 35 percent2
1) Jakob Nielsen, Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI '92 (3.-7. May 1992), pp. 373-380.
2) Jakob Nielsen, http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_evaluation.html
Heuristic evaluation? • What
– A usability inspection method– One or more expert evaluators systematically
inspect a user interface design– Judge its compliance with recognized usability
principles
• When– At any point in the design process
• Who– More is better– Best results with at least 3-5 evaluators– 1 is better than none!
Yes, more is better
Courtesy of useit.comhttp://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_evaluation.html
How?• Evaluators review interface individually
– Report problems to coordinator– Assign severity ratings
• Coordinator combines problems– Removes duplicates
• Evaluators review combined list – Optional - assign severity ratings as a group
• Coordinator averages ratings– Ranks problems by severity
• Web team looks for patterns and find solutions
Why?• Good method for finding both major and
minor problems in a user interface– Finds major problems quickly– Will tend to be dominated numerically by the
minor problems– So, it is important to rate errors and rank
them
• Compliments user testing– Not a replacement for it– Used to find different types of errors
• Things an “expert” user would notice
Rating errors• Frequency
– Is it common or rare
• Impact– Easy or difficult for the users to overcome?
• Persistence– A one-time problem?
• Users can overcome once they know about it
– Repeatedly be bothered by the problem?
• Market impact– Certain usability problems can have a
devastating effect, even if they are quite easy to overcome
Rating scale0 = Not a problem
I don't agree that this is a usability problem at all
1 = Cosmetic problem only Need not be fixed unless extra time is available
2 = Minor usability problem Fix should be given low priority
3 = Major usability problem Important, so should be given high priority
4 = Usability catastrophe Imperative to fix this before release
Heuristics (1-5)
1) Visibility of system status2) Match between system and the
real world 3) User control and freedom4) Consistency and standards5) Error prevention
Heuristics (6-10)
6) Recognition rather than recall7) Flexibility and efficiency of use8) Aesthetic and minimalist design9) Error recovery10)Help and documentation
That’s great, but…
• So, how do you apply this in the real world?
• Several possibilitiesUnstructured evaluationStructured evaluation
Unstructured evaluation
• Let the experts find the problems as they occur
• Provides greater “free-form” discovery of problems
• More appropriate when working with usability experts
Edmonton Public Library site
• 3 evaluators reviewed the site• 2 passes through the site• 1 ½ to 2 hours
Report summary
• More than 100 unique violations• Over 60 violations for “consistency
and standards”• Another frequently violated
heuristic being the “match between the system and the real world” – due to poor labels, jargon and
ordering of items
Frequency by heuristic
Frequency of Reports by Heuristic
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Help and Documentation
Recover from Errors
Aesthetic and Minimalist Design
Flexibility and Eff iciency of use
Recognition rather than Recall
Error Prevention
Consistency and Standards
User Control and Freedom
Match Betw een System and Real World
Visibility of System Status
Problems by area
Microcontent Hierarchy Visual Design Side Menu Navigation Language Search Total1 2 0 11 0 5 3 0 212 13 11 20 4 14 3 4 693 11 9 7 5 12 9 2 554 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4
Total 26 20 38 12 32 15 6 149
Area
Se
veri
ty
Link Colors
Main links in purple
Smaller links in blue
Other areas had different link colors altogether
Different Menus
No ‘Home’ button
‘Borrower Services’ not found as a main page heading
Menu options are the search links for the Song Index
No side navigation menu offered.
Labels, Language and Ambiguity
•Overlap.•Mismatch between heading and items •Vague headings
Audience specific areas are scattered
Structured evaluation
• Develop a list of specific questions related to the issues at hand– Tie back to heuristic principles
• Provides greater direction of problem-solving energy
• More appropriate when relying on “subject” experts
Sample questions at Northwestern
1. Did you feel that you were able to tell what was going on with the system while you were working?
2. Did the language on the site make sense to you? Were you able to understand what the pages were trying to communicate?
3. Did you notice inconsistencies in the way things were referred to?
4. Were you able to navigate and use the site without having to refer back to other pages for needed information?
Feedback - what people said• Question: Did the language on the site
make sense to you? Were you able to understand what the pages were trying to communicate?
– No, sentences are too long. Use numbers to mark each choice
– Some of the language seemed a bit like "library-ese," i.e. terms like "descriptor," etc
– Most of the language makes sense, in the sense that it is not jargon (except for "NUcat"), but as I said the contents of the categories are not always clear
Long sentences
Jargon
Interesting observations
• There are too many choices which are hard to distinguish between
• It seems like the info organization probably reflects the internal structures of the library more than the user's point of view
• I generally felt lost on the site. It was unclear where I needed to go to actually find anything I needed
• Too much information on one page
? ??
???
How is heuristic evaluation relevant to usability testing?
• Allow us to fix big problems before user testing
• Provides a clue to problem areas– Can be basis for determining usability
questions
How is this different from usability testing?
• Analyzing the user interface is the responsibility of the evaluator
• Observer can answer questions from the evaluators during the session
• Evaluators can be provided with hints on using the interface
Other types of evaluation techniques
• Heuristic evaluation• Heuristic estimation• Cognitive walkthrough • Pluralistic walkthrough • Feature inspection • Consistency inspection • Standards inspection • Formal usability inspection
Questions?
Frank CervoneAssistant University Librarian for Information TechnologyNorthwestern UniversityEvanston, IL, [email protected]
Darlene FichterData Librarian
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, SK, [email protected]