a b s t r a c tAs a mobile phone has various advanced functionalities or features, usability issues are increasingly challenging. Due to the particular characteristics of a mobile phone, typical usability evaluation methods and heuristics, most of which are relevant to a software system, might not effectively be applied to a mobile phone. Another point to consider is that usability evaluation activities should help designers find usability problems easily and produce better design solutions. To support usability practitioners of the mobile phone industry, we propose a framework for evaluating the usability of a mobile phone, based on a multilevel, hierarchical model of usability factors, in an analytic way. The model was developed on the basis of a set of collected usability problems and our previous study on a conceptual framework for identifying usability impact factors. It has multi-abstraction levels, each of which considers the usability of a mobile phone from a particular perspective. As there are goal-means relationships between adjacent levels, a range of usability issues can be interpreted in a holistic as well as diagnostic way. Another advantage is that it supports two different types of evaluation approaches: task-based and interface-based. To support both evaluation approaches, we developed four sets of checklists, each of which is concerned, respectively, with task-based evaluation and three different interface types: Logical User Interface (LUI), Physical User Interface (PUI) and Graphical User Interface (GUI). The proposed framework specifies an approach to quantifying usability so that several usability aspects are collectively measured to give a single score with the use of the checklists. A small case study was conducted in order to examine the applicability of the framework and to identify the aspects of the framework to be improved. It showed that it could be a useful tool for evaluating the usability of a mobile phone. Based on the case study, we improved the framework in order that usability practitioners can use it more easily and consistently.

Abstract-Recently there has been increasing research interest in displaying graphs with curved edges to produce more readable visualizations. While there are several automatic techniques, little has been done to evaluate their effectiveness empirically. In this paper we present two experiments studying the impact of edge curvature on graph readability. The goal is to understand the advantages and disadvantages of using curved edges for common graph tasks compared to straight line segments, which are the conventional choice for showing edges in node-link diagrams. We included several edge variations: straight edges, edges with different curvature levels, and mixed straight and curved edges. During the experiments, participants were asked to complete network tasks including determination of connectivity, shortest path, node degree, and common neighbors. We also asked the participants to provide subjective ratings of the aesthetics of different edge types. The results show significant performance differences between the straight and curved edges and clear distinctions between variations of curved edges.

No abstract

No abstract

Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author's name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pagination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award.

Background Traditional safety concept, which is called Safety-I, and its relevant methods and models have much contributed toward enhancing the safety of industrial systems. However, they have proved insufficient to be applied to complex socio-technical systems. As an alternative, Safety-II and resilience engineering have emerged and gained much attention for the last two decades. However, it seems that safety professionals have still difficulty understanding their fundamental concepts and methods. Accordingly, it is necessary to offer an introductory guide to them that helps safety professionals grasp them correctly in consideration of their current practices. Methods This article firstly explains the limitations of Safety-I and how Safety-II can resolve them from the four points of view. Next, the core concepts of resilience engineering and Functional Resonance Analysis Method are described. Results Workers' performance adjustment and performance variability due to it should be the basis for understanding human-related accidents in socio-technical systems. It should be acknowledged that successful and failed work performance have the same causes. However, they are not well considered in the traditional safety concept; in contrast, Safety-II and resilience engineering have conceptual bases and practical approaches to reflect them systematically. Conclusion It is necessary to move from a find-and-fix and reactive approach to a proactive approach to safety management. Safety-II and resilience engineering give a set of useful concepts and methods for proactive safety management. However, if necessary, Safety-I methods need to be properly used for situations where they can still be useful as well.

No abstract

No abstract