Evaluation Studies

Usability Testing

A wide range of techniques designed to measure a products ability to satisfy the needs of the end user and to meet the project requirements. Another denition: user testing is an evaluative method that allows teams to observe an individual experience with digital application.

What is Usability Testing?

Accessibility

Functionality

Ease of Use

Most commonly used in interactive and web design. However, these concepts can be applied to any product intend for human use,delivered either on digital or print medium.

Where Usability Testing is used?

1- It helps identify parts of interface that frustrate and confuse users so they can be xed at rst place. 2- To test whether the developed product is usable by the targted user population to achieve the purpose for which it was designed for.

Why Usability Testing?

Usability key performance indicators:

1- Staying under the budget: User testing in the early stages of development, as a formative research in an iterative (repetitive) design process, will ensure that usability obstacles are cleared before project moves to production. Correcting usability after a project is launched can cost signicant time and money. 2- Higher ROI ( return on investment): High usability, through user testing and iterative design, can lead to increased sales, business leads and lower customer support coasts. 3- Increased customer satisfaction: Sights and interfaces designed with user testing practices will provide positive user experiences, higher customer satisfaction and positive brand association.

Video Recordings
collect additional information from users about the product 1- Facial expressions 2- keystrokes 3- mouse movements

Usability Testing methods

Structured or Semi-Structured Interviews

Collecting Data
Find out how users feel about using the product It reveals what they are thinking

Think Aloud

User Satisfaction Questionnaire

Collecting data about users performance on predened tasks is a central component of usability testing.

* User satisfaction questionnaire is done through asking them to rate it along a number of scales, after interacting with it. * Sometimes evaluators also collect data about how the product is used in the eld.

Usability Testing methods

Usability Testing tasks examples

Searching for information

Reading different typefaces

navigatie through menus

UsabilityTesting performance measures

Time

Number

The time it takes typical users to complete a task, such as nding a website.

The number of errors that participants make, such as selecting wrong menu options when creating a spreadsheet.

Data obtained from Usability Testing

According to Wixon and Wilson, 1997 , The quantitative performance measures that are obtained during the tests produce the following data:
1- Time to complete a task. 2- Time to complete a task after a specied time away from the product. 3- Number and type of errors per task. 4- Number of errors per unit of time. 5- Number of navigations to online help or manuals. 6- Number of users making a particular error. 7- Number of users completing a task successfully.

Usability Testing number of users

5 to 12 user is considered an acceptable number, but sometimes it is possible to use fewer when there are budget and schedule constraints 2 or 3 users, are able to give quick feedback about a design idea, such as the initial placement of a logo on a website

Usability Testing Labs & Equipment

Microsoft and IBM, used to test their products in custom-built usability labs (Lund, 1994). The space may be arranged to supercially mimic features of the real world.

Usability Testing Labs & Equipment

Microphones are also placed near where the participants will be sitting to record their utterances

Typically there are two to three wall-mounted Video cameras that record the users behav-ior

Video and other data is fed through to monitors in the observation room

Usability Testing Labs & Equipment

The observation room is usually separated from the main laboratory or workroom by a one-way mirror
so that evaluators can watch participants being tested but testers cannot see them.

It can be a small auditorium with rows of seats at different levels or, more simply, a small backroom consist-ing of a row of chairs facing the monitors. They are designed so that evaluators and others can watch the tests while ongoing, both on the monitors and through the mirror. Usability labs can be very expensive and labor intensive to run and maintain.

Usability Testing Labs & Equipment

Usability Testing Labs & Equipment

A less expensive alternative is the use of mobile usability testing equipment. Video cameras, laptops, and other measuring equip-ment are temporarily set up in an ofce or other space, converting it into a makeshift usabilitY laboratory.

Usability Testing Alternative

One advantage is that equipment can be taken into work settings, enabling testing to be done on site, making it less articial and more convenient for the participants.

Usability Testing Alternative

lab-in-a-box or lab-in-a-suitcase

Tracksys system with mobile camera

Lab-in-a-box or lab-in-a-suitcase because they neatly into a convenient carrying case. One example costs is the Tracksys portable lab that under $5000 depending on exactly what equipment is included It is composed of off-the-shelf components that plug into a PC and can record video direct to hard disk.

GoToMeeting package, an easier remote control system, new eye-tracking devices, including a remote eye-tracker, and a mobile head-mounted eye tracker. The latter is tted to a helmet or lightweight cap so that the system offers complete portability for research in sports, usability studies.

The goal of the study is to understand how the interactions with the device affected people and to get feedback to their clients and developers as well as people who were eager to know if the iPad lived up to the hype which was being reported at the time it came to market. Methods
Structured or Semi-Structured Interviews

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Think Aloud

The research question is whether it is worth developing specic websites for the iPad (in the way some companies were doing for smartphones) or would the desktop versions be acceptable when interacted with using the iPad multitouch interface?

The aim of the test was to understand the typical usability issues that people encounter when using applications and accessing websites on the iPad.

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Users werw 7 participants. Aall were experienced iPhone users who had owned their phones for at least 3 months and who had used a variety of apps. One participant was also an iPad owner. One reason for selecting participants who used iPhones was because they would have previous experience of using apps and the web with a similar interaction style to the iPad. Users varied in age and occupation. Two participants were in their 20s, three were in their 30s, one in their 50s, and one in their 60s. Their occupations were: food server, paralegal, medical assistant, retired food driver, account rep, and homemaker. 3 were males and 4 were females.

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Participants were asked to read and sign an informed consent form agreeing to the terms and conditions of the study which includes: 1- What the participant would be asked to do 2- The length of the study 3- The participants right to withdraw from the study 4- A promise that the persons identity would not be disclosed 5- Condentiality of the collected data

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Participants were asked to comment on: What they were looking for or read-ing What they liked and disliked about a site What made it easy or difcult to carry out a task

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Note: Each participant was assigned the tasks in a ran domized order.

All the apps were designed specically for the iPad, but for some tasks the users were asked to do task on a website

The Equipment The laptop ran software called Morae, which synchronized data streams. Up to three observers (including the moderator sitting next to the participant) watched the video streams (rather than observ-ing the participant directly) on their laptops situated on the table meaning they did not have to invade the participants personal space.

Usability Testing Case Study (iPad)

Usability Testing Video Links

http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=BrVnBdW6_rE

Usability Testing References

1- BUDIU,R. and NIELSEN, J. (2010) Usability of iPad Apps and Websites: First research ndings. Nielsen Norman Group downloadable from: www. nngroup.com/reportsimobile/ipad 2- DUMAS, J.S. and REDISH, J.C. (1999) A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. 3- Sharp, H., Rogers, Y., & Preece, J. (2007). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction. Chichester: Wiley.

Usability Testing

Thank you