Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| school:classes:cs352:start [20 years ago - 2006/01/25 00:49] – aogail | school:classes:cs352:start [19 years ago - 2007/05/28 06:45] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== CS 352 ====== | ====== CS 352 ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Project ===== | ||
| + | * [[project/ | ||
| ===== HCI ===== | ===== HCI ===== | ||
| Line 291: | Line 294: | ||
| * Cleaned up version of notes. | * Cleaned up version of notes. | ||
| - | ====== Ethics | + | ===== Ethics ===== |
| - | ===== Learning Objectives | + | ==== Learning Objectives ==== |
| * Discuss ethical concerns. | * Discuss ethical concerns. | ||
| Line 301: | Line 304: | ||
| * Responsibilities to participants before, during, after study. | * Responsibilities to participants before, during, after study. | ||
| - | ===== History | + | ==== History ==== |
| * Nuremberg doctor trials. | * Nuremberg doctor trials. | ||
| Line 309: | Line 312: | ||
| * Human radiation experiments. | * Human radiation experiments. | ||
| - | ==== Nuremberg doctor trials | + | === Nuremberg doctor trials === |
| * Nazi physicians charged conducting inhuman experiments on civilians and prisoners. | * Nazi physicians charged conducting inhuman experiments on civilians and prisoners. | ||
| Line 331: | Line 334: | ||
| * Code did not have much effect. | * Code did not have much effect. | ||
| - | ==== Milgram obedience experiments | + | === Milgram obedience experiments === |
| * Designed to answer question "Could it be that Eichmann and hist milion accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders?" | * Designed to answer question "Could it be that Eichmann and hist milion accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders?" | ||
| Line 340: | Line 343: | ||
| * "I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the lab smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck, who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse." | * "I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the lab smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck, who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse." | ||
| - | ==== Belmont Report | + | === Belmont Report === |
| - | === Basic Principles | + | == Basic Principles == |
| * Respect for persons. | * Respect for persons. | ||
| Line 348: | Line 351: | ||
| * Justice. | * Justice. | ||
| - | === Institutional Review Board === | + | == Institutional Review Board == |
| * IRB has authority to approve, require modification, | * IRB has authority to approve, require modification, | ||
| Line 354: | Line 357: | ||
| * Safeguard mechanism. | * Safeguard mechanism. | ||
| - | === Informed Consent | + | == Informed Consent == |
| * Informed consent is a process of information exchange that takes place between the prospective investigator, | * Informed consent is a process of information exchange that takes place between the prospective investigator, | ||
| Line 361: | Line 364: | ||
| * Must not be coerced through any means, including incentive. | * Must not be coerced through any means, including incentive. | ||
| - | === Investigator' | + | == Investigator' |
| * Investigators bear ultimate ethical responsibility for their work with human participants. | * Investigators bear ultimate ethical responsibility for their work with human participants. | ||
| Line 371: | Line 374: | ||
| * Submission of all technical, progress, invention, and financial reports on timely basis. | * Submission of all technical, progress, invention, and financial reports on timely basis. | ||
| + | ===== Project Description ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Groups of 4-5 | ||
| + | * Four phases: | ||
| + | * Proposal (2/7) | ||
| + | * Prototype 1 (2/21) | ||
| + | * Evaluation plan (2/28) | ||
| + | * Final system & evaluation (3/16) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Proposal ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Identify a real **usability** need, for a real population. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Describe the problem (current breakdown and the ideal situation). | ||
| + | * Document the problem (how you know there is a problem to begin with). | ||
| + | * Who are your users. | ||
| + | * Ideas about a solution. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Prototypes ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Build a presentation for a design gallery. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Evaluation Plan ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Based upon feedback from prototype and problem you identified: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Write a convincing and realistic evaluation plan to see if you have reached all/some of your objectives. | ||
| + | * Perform said evaluations on your fellow students. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Final Presentation ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Just like prototype presentation, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Other Study Techniques ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Cognitive Walkthrough ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Subject is usually an expert in UI, etc. | ||
| + | * Think-Aloud protocol is part of cognitive walkthrough: | ||
| + | * User describes verbally what he's thinking while performing tasks. | ||
| + | * What they believe is happening. | ||
| + | * Why they take an action. | ||
| + | * What they are trying to do. | ||
| + | * Researcher takes notes about task and actions. | ||
| + | * Makes less assumptions about why things are happening. | ||
| + | * Very widely used. | ||
| + | * Yields good results with few people. | ||
| + | * Potential problems: | ||
| + | * Can be awkward for participant. | ||
| + | * Can modify way user performs tasks. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Alternative === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * What if thinking aloud will be too disruptive? | ||
| + | * Can use post-event protocol. | ||
| + | * User performs session, then watches video and describes what she was thinking. | ||
| + | * Sometimes difficult to recall. | ||
| + | * Opens up door of interpretation/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Related: Diary Study ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Subject asked to keep journal of daily activities. | ||
| + | * Record actions, reasons, and other observations. | ||
| + | * Not always subjective. | ||
| + | * Prevents researcher from having to be everywhere 24/7. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Interviews ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * 3 types: | ||
| + | * Structured: | ||
| + | * Well-defined agenda. | ||
| + | * Efficient. | ||
| + | * Require training. | ||
| + | * Unstructured: | ||
| + | * No agenda. | ||
| + | * Let subject go in whatever direction they need to go. | ||
| + | * Difficult to not influence direction. | ||
| + | * Inefficient. | ||
| + | * Less training. | ||
| + | * Semi-structured: | ||
| + | * Good balance of training/ | ||
| + | * Often appropriate. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Semi-Structured Interviews === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Predetermine data of interest - know why you are asking questions, don't waste time. | ||
| + | * Guidelines: | ||
| + | * Stay concrete (specific). | ||
| + | * "So when the new guy joined the team and hadn't gotten his email account set up yet, what happened then?" vs. "What generally happens here when someone new joins the team?" | ||
| + | * Signs to look for: | ||
| + | * Interviewee waves hand and looks up at ceiling => generalization coming. | ||
| + | * Use of passive voice, " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Surveys ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * General Criteria | ||
| + | * Make questions clear and specific. | ||
| + | * Ask some closed questions with a range of answers. | ||
| + | * Sometimes also have a no opinion option, or other answer option. | ||
| + | * Do test run with two or three people. | ||
| + | * Likert Scale | ||
| + | * Usually odd # of points: 5, 7 point scale; agree to disagree. | ||
| + | * Could also use words for each level. | ||
| + | * Sometimes need to use black & white answer questions to get a normalization range. | ||
| + | * Other Typical Questions | ||
| + | * Rank importance of each of these items... | ||
| + | * List the four most important tasks that you perform (open question). | ||
| + | * List the pieces of information you need to have before making a decision about X, in order of importance. | ||
| + | * Are there any other points you would like to make? | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Participatory Design ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Scandanavian history. | ||
| + | * Scandanavia has fairly strong labor unions. | ||
| + | * Workers involved in all decisions. | ||
| + | * Emphasis on social and organizational aspects. | ||
| + | * Based on study, model-building, | ||
| + | * User is a part of the team. | ||
| + | * Immediate feedback. | ||
| + | * Sanity checking. | ||
| + | * Much tighter feedback cycle. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== User Centered Design ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Input & Output ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Gather data: | ||
| + | * Surveys/ | ||
| + | * Interviews. | ||
| + | * Etc. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Represent Data === | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Task Outline == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * List what task is about. | ||
| + | * Add progressive layers of detail as you go. | ||
| + | * Know in advance how much detail is enough. | ||
| + | * Can add linked outlines for specific subtasks. | ||
| + | * Good for sequential tasks. | ||
| + | * Does not support parallel tasks well. | ||
| + | * Does not support branching well. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Use Cases/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Describe tasks in sentences. | ||
| + | * More effective for communicating general idea of task. | ||
| + | * Scenarios: " | ||
| + | * Focus on tasks/ | ||
| + | * Use Cases | ||
| + | * Focus on user-system interaction, | ||
| + | * How to do a task using the system, not what tasks to do. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Hierarchical Task Analysis == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Graphical notation & decomposition of tasks. | ||
| + | * Goals -- what the user wants to achieve. | ||
| + | * Tasks -- do these to achieve the goals. | ||
| + | * Looping, conditionals integrated. | ||
| + | * See slides for example hierarchy. | ||
| + | * Types of Plans: | ||
| + | * Fixed sequence | ||
| + | * Optional tasks | ||
| + | * Waiting events | ||
| + | * Cycles | ||
| + | * Time-sharing | ||
| + | * Discretionary | ||
| + | |||
| + | == ER Diagram == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Objects/ | ||
| + | * Stress relationship between objects and actions. | ||
| + | * Close to the type of thing you would say to a DB designer or programmer. | ||
| + | * More difficult for user to understand. | ||
| + | * No way to represent knowledge, ideas, motivation, etc. | ||
| + | * Lends itself better in specifying to a developer what he needs to create. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Flow Charts == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Many types. | ||
| + | * Decisions | ||
| + | * Actions | ||
| + | * Information flow | ||
| + | * Combines ERD with sequential flow, branching, parallel tasks. | ||
| + | * Tracks something being moved around. | ||
| + | * Visually appealing, easy to understand. | ||
| + | * More abstract than HTA. | ||
| + | * Much quicker overview of system. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Midterm ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * What is usability engineering/ | ||
| + | * Define | ||
| + | * Describe process/ | ||
| + | * Arguments for UE/ | ||
| + | * Basics of human subjects research | ||
| + | * Some history/ | ||
| + | * Importance of Milgram experiments | ||
| + | * Basics of Belmont report | ||
| + | * Studying Users | ||
| + | * Describe methods discussed in class | ||
| + | * Argue pros & cons of each, different variations | ||
| + | * Propose an approach to studying a given hypothetical place/ | ||
| + | * How to organize and analyze data | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Prototyping & Design ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What is a prototype? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | A prototype is a simplification of a system. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In interaction design, it could be: | ||
| + | * Screet sketches | ||
| + | * Storyboard | ||
| + | * Slide show | ||
| + | * Video simulation | ||
| + | * Lump of wood (Physical mock up) | ||
| + | * Software with limited functionality | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Why prototype? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Put many ideas out there. By making prototypes, you can evaluate many options effectively. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Facilitates evaluation: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Stakeholders can see, hold, interact with. | ||
| + | * Team members can communicate more effectively. | ||
| + | * Test ideas yourself. | ||
| + | * Encourages reflection. | ||
| + | * Answer questions, support designers in choosing among alternatives. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What to prototype? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Work flow, task design | ||
| + | * Screen layouts and information display | ||
| + | * Difficult, controversial, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Compromises ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | All prototypes involve compromises. For software prototyping there may be a slow response, stetchy icons, limited functionality, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Low Fidelity Prototyping ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Rough prototype of system. | ||
| + | * Uses medium unlike the final medium. | ||
| + | * Quick, cheap, easily changed. | ||
| + | * Encourages high level criticism; problems with conceptual models and fundamental usability or functionality issues. | ||
| + | * Users unafraid to suggest major changes. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Storyboards === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Often used with scenarios. | ||
| + | * Indicate a series of events. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== High Fidelity Prototyping ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Looks and behaves like a subset of the final system. | ||
| + | * Commanly used tools: Director, VisualBasic, | ||
| + | * Users may think they have a full system (problem) | ||
| + | * Get at details of design (layout, icons, colors) | ||
| + | * Should not think of prototype as part of finished system (no recycling) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Medium Fidelity? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Somewhere in between. | ||
| + | * High production values, no/limited interaction. | ||
| + | * E.g. Photoshop | ||
| + | * Tests detail of design without commiting. | ||
| + | * Because no functionality, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Prototyping & Evaluation ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * (Early) | ||
| + | * (Low fidelity) | ||
| + | * Rough out on paper | ||
| + | * Cognitive walkthrough | ||
| + | * Formative evaluation | ||
| + | * (Late) | ||
| + | |||
| + | See slides. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Formative Evaluations ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Done on low fidelity prototypes. | ||
| + | * Wizard of Oz - smoke and mirrors to simulate working system. | ||
| + | * GOMS and action analysis - uses models to predict certain attributes of prototypes. | ||
| + | * Cognitive walkthroughs. | ||
| + | * Heuristic evaluations - artificial evaluation using a top-ten list of mistakes or good practices. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Project 2 - Initial Prototypes ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Prepare a prototype that answers two things: | ||
| + | * What is the problem? | ||
| + | * Who are users? | ||
| + | * What are their needs? | ||
| + | * What are constraints? | ||
| + | * What is your solution? | ||
| + | * Present multiple prototypes. | ||
| + | * Sketches, storyboards, | ||
| + | * Why for each. Pros/cons. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Human Stuff ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Cognitive Processes ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Attention | ||
| + | * Perception and recognition | ||
| + | * Memory | ||
| + | * Learning | ||
| + | * Reading, speaking, listening | ||
| + | * Problem-solving, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Senses ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Sight, hearing, touch important for design of current interfaces. | ||
| + | * Smell, taste? | ||
| + | * Balance and propioception (where limbs etc. are physically) | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Key Sense Concepts === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Absolute threshold | ||
| + | * Thresholds that determine what range you can sense. | ||
| + | * Upper and lower thresholds. | ||
| + | * Signal detection theory | ||
| + | * Ability to tune in/out stimuli. | ||
| + | * Just noticeable difference | ||
| + | * How much change is required before you sense the difference? | ||
| + | * Sensory adaptation | ||
| + | * We react to change. | ||
| + | * Absense of change leads us to loose sensitivity (psychological nystagmus). | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Vision === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Visual Angle | ||
| + | * Total: 200 degrees. | ||
| + | * High-res: ~15 degrees. | ||
| + | * Rods | ||
| + | * 120 million. | ||
| + | * B&W | ||
| + | * 1000x more sensitive than cones. | ||
| + | * Cones | ||
| + | * 6-7 million. | ||
| + | * 64% red. | ||
| + | * 32% green. | ||
| + | * 2% blue. | ||
| + | * Phenomena | ||
| + | * Color perception: | ||
| + | * 7-8% males cannot distinguish red from green. | ||
| + | * 0.4% of women. | ||
| + | * Peripheral vision is largely movement oriented. | ||
| + | * Stereopsis: | ||
| + | * (Stereopsis is ability to see in three dimensions.) | ||
| + | * Monocular (size, interposition, | ||
| + | * Ability to detect depth with one eye. | ||
| + | * Binocular (retinal disparity, accommodation) | ||
| + | * Ability to detect depth with two eyes. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Hearing === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Capabilities | ||
| + | * Frequency: 20-20,000 Hz | ||
| + | * Loudness: 30 - 100 dB | ||
| + | * Location: 5˚ source & stream separation | ||
| + | * Timbre: Type of sound (lots of instruments) | ||
| + | * Often take for granted how good it is. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Motor System === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Our output system. | ||
| + | * Capabilities | ||
| + | * Range of movement, reach, speed, strength, dexterity, accuracy. | ||
| + | * Workstation/ | ||
| + | * Often cause of errors: | ||
| + | * Wrong button. | ||
| + | * Double-click vs. single. | ||
| + | * Principles | ||
| + | * Feedback is important. | ||
| + | * Minimize eye movement. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== The Model Human Processor ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Classic study from CS perspective of how brain works | ||
| + | * Microprocessor-human analogue using results from experimental psychology. | ||
| + | * Provides a view of the human that fits much experimental data. | ||
| + | * But it is partial model. | ||
| + | * Focus is on a single user interacting with some entity (computer, environment, | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Memory === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Perceptual " | ||
| + | * Brief impressions | ||
| + | * Short-term (working) memory: | ||
| + | * Conscious thought, calculations. | ||
| + | * Different store for visual vs. auditory memory. | ||
| + | * Order of seconds. | ||
| + | * Long-term memory: | ||
| + | * Minutes, hours, days, years, decades. | ||
| + | * Long term, large storage space. | ||
| + | * Access is harder, slower. | ||
| + | * Retrieval depends upon network of associations. | ||
| + | * Memory Structure | ||
| + | * Episodic Memory | ||
| + | * Events and experiences in serial form. | ||
| + | * Helps us recall what occured. | ||
| + | * Semantic memory | ||
| + | * Structured record of facts, concepts, skills. | ||
| + | * One theory says it's like a network. | ||
| + | * Another uses frames & scripts. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Decision Making Models ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Understanding cognition important because it helps you understand how to teach people. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Production systems | ||
| + | * If-then rules | ||
| + | * Work like a computer program | ||
| + | * Connectionism (big idea in AI) | ||
| + | * Neural networks | ||
| + | * Hidden Markov models | ||
| + | * Bayesian networks | ||
| + | * Modeled after a network of nodes | ||
| + | * Nodes are factoids or rules. | ||
| + | * Connections between. | ||
| + | * Any time you follow a path that leads to success, strengthen the path. | ||
| + | * Any time you make a mistake, weaken the path. | ||
| + | * Mediated action | ||
| + | * Actions must be interpreted in context | ||
| + | * Tools, setting, culture affect | ||
| + | * Objects " | ||
| + | * The way things are shaped and presented affects how people interact with them | ||
| + | * Case-based reasoning | ||
| + | * Learn from experience, reasoning same as memory | ||
| + | * Plans, schemes, and automation | ||
| + | * Take closest matching experience and modify it to meet requirements | ||
| + | * External/ | ||
| + | * Emphasizes reflexes and stuff | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Evaluation ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Evaluation is part of the design cycle. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Why evaluate? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * If you make a mistake and don't catch it, it'll screw you later. | ||
| + | * If we think of design as iterative process, we need to evaluate whether we're getting better. | ||
| + | * Also, at each stage of design we make assumptions. We need to check whether those assumptions match reality. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What is evaluation? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Different from requirements gathering: | ||
| + | * Testing a hypothesis. | ||
| + | * Often use different methods, more focused. | ||
| + | * Methods you choose depend on debates: | ||
| + | * Quant. vs. quals. | ||
| + | * Controlled vs. ecological validity | ||
| + | * Cost vs. relevance. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Steps Involved ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Formulate hypothesis. | ||
| + | * Hypothesis = statement of fact. | ||
| + | * Important to have hypothesis for data analysis. | ||
| + | * Design a test plan. | ||
| + | * Picking a method. | ||
| + | * Selecting users. | ||
| + | * Writing out procedure. | ||
| + | * Get IRB permission. | ||
| + | * Deal with users. | ||
| + | * Deal with data. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Testing Methods ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Formative | ||
| + | * Artificial/ | ||
| + | * Isolate variables, level playing field. | ||
| + | * Removes " | ||
| + | * Thoroughly documented. | ||
| + | * Focus **only** on your question. | ||
| + | * Issues: | ||
| + | * Putting people in contrived environment causes changes in how people interact. | ||
| + | * Results from controlled experiments can't be directly compared to real world. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Hypothesis Testing ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Example hypotheses: | ||
| + | * X is better/ | ||
| + | * X improved more than Y. | ||
| + | |||
| + | - Specify null hypothesis (H0) and alternative hypothesis (H1). | ||
| + | - Define H1 = true iff H0 = false. | ||
| + | - Select significance level. Typically P = 0.05 or P = 0.10 | ||
| + | - Sample population and calculate statistics. | ||
| + | - Calculate probability (p-value) of obtaining a sta... | ||
| + | (SEE SLIDES) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Dealing with Data ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Academic honesty key. | ||
| + | * Falsifiability of results. | ||
| + | * Need for meticulous records. | ||
| + | * Keep records unmodified. | ||
| + | * Objectivity. | ||
| + | * Peer review. | ||
| + | * Replication. | ||
| + | * Not done in software design. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Statistical Significance ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Statistical significance means: Two populations differ to a significant extent along some variable. | ||
| + | * Statistical significance does NOT mean noteworthy. | ||
| + | * Typically in either rate of occurance, or the value of some result. | ||
| + | * E.g. group A 2x likely to do well on tests than group B (statistically significant), | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Significance: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * What does significance mean? | ||
| + | * Type I: False negative. | ||
| + | * Type II: False positive. | ||
| + | * Set significance to balance risks of type I or II errors: | ||
| + | * When might low type I and high type II (vice versa) be preferable? | ||
| + | * These types of errors may arise from equipment limits, etc. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Predictive Models ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Models used to predict human behavior, responses. | ||
| + | * Stimulus-Response | ||
| + | * Hick's law: | ||
| + | * Decision time to choose among N equally likely alternatives. | ||
| + | * T = Ic log2(n+1) | ||
| + | * Ic = time to recognize each item = 150msec | ||
| + | * Useful for pilot tests. | ||
| + | * Fitt's law. | ||
| + | * Time it takes to select something on screen. | ||
| + | * ID = log2(d/w + 1.0) | ||
| + | * d = distance; w = width of target; ID = index of difficulty | ||
| + | * Cognitive - human as interpreter/ | ||
| + | * Keystroke Level Model: | ||
| + | * Puts together lots of mini-models, | ||
| + | * Assigns times for basic human operations - experimentally verified. | ||
| + | * Based upon MHP. | ||
| + | * Accounts for: | ||
| + | * Keystroking: | ||
| + | * Mouse button press: Tb | ||
| + | * Pointing: Tp | ||
| + | * Hand movement between kbd/mouse: Th | ||
| + | * Drawing straight line segments: Td | ||
| + | * " | ||
| + | * System response time: Tr | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Within-Subject or Between-Subject Design ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Between subjects: Pool using prototype 1, separate pool using prototype 2. | ||
| + | * Clean statistics -- less noise. | ||
| + | * Within-subjects: | ||
| + | * Removes people variations. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Heuristic Evaluation ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Discount Usability Engineering ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Cheap | ||
| + | * No special labs/ | ||
| + | * More careful you are, the better it gets. | ||
| + | * Fast | ||
| + | * On order of 1 day to apply. | ||
| + | * Standard usability testing may take a week. | ||
| + | * Easy to use | ||
| + | * Can be taught in 2-4 hours. | ||
| + | * Reliance on discount UE can lead to sloppiness. | ||
| + | * Easy to ignore more thorough evaluation methods. | ||
| + | * Not all you need. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== HE Overview ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Developed by Jacob Nielsen. | ||
| + | * Involves a set of guidelines -- heuristics. | ||
| + | * Rules come from real-world experience. | ||
| + | * Helps find usability problems in UI design. | ||
| + | * Small set (3-5) of evaluators examine UI. | ||
| + | * Independently check for compliance with usability principles (heuristics). | ||
| + | * Different evaluators will find different problems. | ||
| + | * Evaluators only communicate afterward; findings are then aggregated. | ||
| + | * Can perform on working UI or sketches. | ||
| + | * Most important ideas: | ||
| + | * Independent analysis. | ||
| + | * Performed on sketches or UI. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Process ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Evaluators go through UI several times. | ||
| + | * Inspect various dialogue elements. | ||
| + | * Compare with list of principles. | ||
| + | * Consider other principles/ | ||
| + | * Usability principles: | ||
| + | * Nielsen' | ||
| + | * Supplementary list of category-specific heuristics. | ||
| + | * May come from competitive analysis & user testing of existing products. | ||
| + | * Fixes for violations may be suggested by heuristics. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Nielsen' | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Simple & natural dialog | ||
| + | * Speak user's language | ||
| + | * Minimize user's memory load | ||
| + | * Consistency | ||
| + | * Feedback | ||
| + | * Clearly marked exits | ||
| + | * Shortcuts | ||
| + | * Precise & constructive error messages | ||
| + | * Prevent errors | ||
| + | * Help and documentation | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Heuristics -- Revised Set ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Visibility of System Status === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Keep user informed about what is going on. | ||
| + | * Example: Pay attention to response time. | ||
| + | * 0.1 sec: No special indicator needed. | ||
| + | * 1.0 sec: User tends to lose track of data. | ||
| + | * 10 sec: Max. duration if user to stay focused on action. | ||
| + | * For longer delays, use progress bars. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Match between system and real world === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Speak user's language. | ||
| + | * Follow real world conventions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Consistency & Standards === | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Aesthetic and minimalist desgin === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * No irrelevant info in dialogs. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== HE vs. User Testing ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * HE much faster. | ||
| + | * HE doesn' | ||
| + | * User testing far more accurate. | ||
| + | * Takes into account actual users and tasks. | ||
| + | * HE may miss problems and find false positives. | ||
| + | * Good to alternate between HE and user testing. | ||
| + | * Find different problems. | ||
| + | * Don't waste participants. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== HE Results ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Single evaluator achieves poor results. | ||
| + | * Only finds 35% of usability problems. | ||
| + | * 5 evaluators find ~75% of problems. | ||
| + | * If they work as team, it's back down to 35%. | ||
| + | * Why not more evaluators? | ||
| + | * Adding evaluators costs more. | ||
| + | * Many more evaluators won't find many more problems. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Evaluation (2) & Wrap-Up ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Evaluation Pt. 2 ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Usability Testing: The Usability Lab === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * A specially designed room for conducting controlled experiments observing a task. | ||
| + | * Cameras, logging systems, people track what users do. | ||
| + | * Good lab costs $$$. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Observation Room == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Three cameras capture subject, subject' | ||
| + | * One-way mirror plus angled glass captures light and isolates sound between rooms. | ||
| + | * Room for several observers. | ||
| + | * Digital mixer for mixing of input images and recording to media. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Other Capture - Software == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Modify software to log user actions. | ||
| + | * Can give time-stamped keypress/ | ||
| + | * Commercial software available ($$$) | ||
| + | * Two problems: | ||
| + | * Too low level, want higher level events | ||
| + | * Massive amount of data; need analysis tools | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Complimentary Methods == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Talkaloud protocols | ||
| + | * Pre/post surveys | ||
| + | * Participant screening/ | ||
| + | * Compare results to existing benchmarks | ||