International Journal of Computer
Trends and Technology

Research Article | Open Access | Download PDF

Volume 22 | Number 1 | Year 2015 | Article Id. IJCTT-V22P121 | DOI : https://doi.org/10.14445/22312803/IJCTT-V22P121

A Comparative study of Usability Evaluation Methods

Sugandha Gupta

Citation :

Sugandha Gupta, "A Comparative study of Usability Evaluation Methods," International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT), vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 103-106, 2015. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/22312803/IJCTT-V22P121

Abstract

Usability is an essential quality of software systems. Many techniques have so far been projected for usability evaluation but they are not well integrated and fail to ensure all the aspects of usability. The inception of usability evaluation methods (UEMs) to assess and improve usability in such systems has led to a variety of alternative methodologies and a general lack of understanding of the proficiencies and limitations of each. This misperception has exaggerated the need for practitioners and others to regulate which methods are more operative, and in what ways and under what scenarios. However, UEMs cannot be assessed and equated reliably because of the lack of standard criteria for comparison. This paper aims at discussing various existing usability evaluation methods (UEM) that have been presented till 2015.

Keywords

Usability, Usability Evaluation Methods (UEMs), Inspection Methods, Human Computer Interaction, Inquiry Methods, Testing Methods.

References

[1] Seffah, A., Donyaee, M., kline, R. B., & Padda, H. K. (2006). Usability measurement and metrics: A consolidated model. Software Quality Journal, 14, 159-178
[2] Virzi RA, Sorce JF, Herbert LB. A comparison of three usability evaluation methods: heuristic, think-aloud, and performance testing. Proceeding of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting. 1993:309–313.
[3] J. Nielsen "Usability Engineering" p.198, Academic Press, 1993.
[4] N. Soken, B. Reinhart, P. Vora, & S. Metz "Methods for Evaluating Usability" (Section 5B), Honeywell, Dec. 1993.
[5] P. Vora & M. Helander "A Teaching method as an alternative to the concurrent think-aloud method for usablity testing", in Y. Anzai, K. Ogawa & H. Mori "Symbiosis of Human and Artifact", pp.375-380, 1995.
[6] "An empirical study of perspective-based usability inspection", by Zhijun Zhang, Victor Basili, and Ben Shneiderman. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Soceity 42nd Annual Meeting. pp. 1346-1350. Chicago, 1998.
[7] Quesenbery, W. (2001). What does usability mean: Looking beyond “ease of use.” Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference Society for Technical Communications.
[8] Abran, A., Khelifi, A., & Suryn, W. (2003). Usability meanings and interpretations in ISO standards. Software Quality Journal, 11, 325- 338
[9] Dix, Finley, J., Abowd, G. and Beale, R., Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, 1998.