Learning by exploration: Thinking aloud while exploring an information system

Oostendorp, Herre van; Mul, Sjaak De

doi:10.1007/bf00897322

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first type compares a concurrent thinkaloud condition to a silent condition. Such a comparison facilitates analysing the effect of thinking aloud on task performance (reactivity), as is shown by, for instance Van Oostendorp and De Mul (1999). They found that thinking aloud had a positive effect on the learning ability of students exploring a computer system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison

Haak

Jong

Schellens

2004

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a comparative study of three usability test approaches: concurrent thinkaloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction. These three methods were compared by means of an evaluation of an online library catalogue, which involved four points of comparison: number and type of usability problems detected; relevance of the problems detected; overall task performance; and participant experiences. The results of the study showed that there were only few significant differences between the usability test approaches, mainly with respect to manner of problem detecting, task performance and participant experience. For the most part, the usability methods proved very much comparable, revealing similar numbers and types of problems that were equally relevant. Taking some practical aspects into account, a case can be made for preferring the concurrent think-aloud protocols over the other two methods. q

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison

Haak

Jong

Schellens

2004

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Let us start by presenting a short overview of these methods. Thinking-aloud is a method that draws out participants' inner thoughts or cognitive processes while they are engaged in interacting with a system (Patton, 2002;Peleg, Shackak, Wang, & Karnieli, 2009) and encourages them to reflect on their own behavior (Van Oostendorp & De Mul, 1999). It can be used to identify unsatisfactory features of a website (Benbunan-Fich, 2001) and reveals the usability problems that users encounter when they are busy interacting with a system (Jaspers, 2009), as well as general comments about a system (Hoppmann, 2009).…”

Section: A Discussion About Three Different Methods: Thinking-aloud mentioning

confidence: 98%

Identifying Usability Issues for Personalization During Formative Evaluations: A Comparison of Three Methods

Velsen

Geest

Klaassen

2011

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A personalized system is one that generates unique output for each individual. As a result, personalization has transformed the interaction between the user and the system, and specific new usability issues have arisen. Methods used for evaluating personalized systems should be able to reveal the issues and problems specifically associated with personalization. Therefore this study evaluated three of the most common test methods used to detect usability problems in a personalized search engine. This was done by comparing the comments generated from thinking-aloud, questionnaires, and interviews. Questionnaires and interviews appear to be more useful for assessing specific usability issues for personalization, whereas thinkingaloud generates more comments on the usefulness of the system in the intended context of use and identifies the most critical and serious problems. Interviews, on the other hand, appear to yield a disproportionate number of positive comments. During the formative evaluation of a personalized system it is best to use a combination of thinking-aloud and questionnaires. This article concludes with a summary of implications for practitioners.

show abstract

“…The first was the familiar "thinking aloud" protocol (e.g., van Oostendorp & de Mull, 1999). Thinking aloud encourages participants to talk about what they are doing and why they are doing it as they are doing it.…”

Section: Dynamic Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic tracking of elementary preservice teachers’ experiences with computer-based mathematics learning environments

Campbell

2003

Math Ed Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A challenging task in educational research today is to understand the implications of recent developments in computer based learning environments. On the other hand, questions regarding learning and mathematical cognition have long been a central focus of research in mathematics education. Adding technology compounds an already complex problematic. Fortunately, computer based technology also provides researchers with new ways of studying cognition and instruction. This paper introduces a new method for dynamically tracking learners' experiences in computer based learning environments. Dynamic tracking is illustrated in both a classroom and a clinical setting by drawing on two studies with elementai T pre service teachers working in computer based mathematics learning environments.

show abstract

Learning by exploration: Thinking aloud while exploring an information system

Cited by 17 publications

References 14 publications

Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison

Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison

Identifying Usability Issues for Personalization During Formative Evaluations: A Comparison of Three Methods

Dynamic tracking of elementary preservice teachers’ experiences with computer-based mathematics learning environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About