Let your users do the testing

Bruun, Anders; Gull, P.; Hofmeister, Lene; Stage, Jan

doi:10.1145/1518701.1518948

Cited by 62 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, our methodological findings also demonstrate the usefulness of remote, asynchronous methods for collecting usability data. While they may not be suitable for all studies, remote, asynchronous methods can save time and expense when compared to the traditional approach of observing individuals as they use the technology of interest [ 46 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alpha test results for a Housing First eLearning strategy: the value of multiple qualitative methods for intervention design

Ahonen

Watson

Adams

et al. 2017

Pilot Feasibility Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDetailed descriptions of implementation strategies are lacking, and there is a corresponding dearth of information regarding methods employed in implementation strategy development. This paper describes methods and findings related to the alpha testing of eLearning modules developed as part of the Housing First Technical Assistance and Training (HFTAT) program’s development. Alpha testing is an approach for improving the quality of a product prior to beta (i.e., real world) testing with potential applications for intervention development.MethodsTen participants in two cities tested the modules. We collected data through (1) a structured log where participants were asked to record their experiences as they worked through the modules; (2) a brief online questionnaire delivered at the end of each module; and (3) focus groups.ResultsThe alpha test provided useful data related to the acceptability and feasibility of eLearning as an implementation strategy, as well as identifying a number of technical issues and bugs. Each of the qualitative methods used provided unique and valuable information. In particular, logs were the most useful for identifying technical issues, and focus groups provided high quality data regarding how the intervention could best be used as an implementation strategy.ConclusionsAlpha testing was a valuable step in intervention development, providing us an understanding of issues that would have been more difficult to address at a later stage of the study. As a result, we were able to improve the modules prior to pilot testing of the entire HFTAT. Researchers wishing to alpha test interventions prior to piloting should balance the unique benefits of different data collection approaches with the need to minimize burdens for themselves and participants.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-017-0187-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alpha test results for a Housing First eLearning strategy: the value of multiple qualitative methods for intervention design

Ahonen

Watson

Adams

et al. 2017

Pilot Feasibility Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The space/time separation requirement raises a number of interesting remote configuration possibilities that were evaluated in (Andreasen et al, 2007;Bruun et al, 2009). These configurations are referred to as moderated/unmoderated or synchronous/asynchronous moderation.…”

Section: The Promise Of Remote Usability Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moderated and synchronous moderation configurations use real-time evaluators, while unmoderated and asynchronous moderation configurations either use an evaluator at some point after the session or have the user act as the evaluator themselves. Asynchronous moderation under RUT has seen mixed results (Vasalou et al, 2004;Andreasen et al, 2007;Bruun et al, 2009;Hertzum et al, 2015). Consequently, synchronous methods for RUT are commonly employed because they provide the same level of data quality as conventional usability testing.…”

Section: The Promise Of Remote Usability Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remote HRI: a Methodology for Maintaining COVID-19 Physical Distancing and Human Interaction Requirements in HRI Studies

Gittens

2021

Inf Syst Front

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observing how humans and robots interact is an integral part of understanding how they can effectively coexist. This ability to undertake these observations was taken for granted before the COVID-19 pandemic restricted the possibilities of performing HRI study-based interactions. We explore the problem of how HRI research can occur in a setting where physical separation is the most reliable way of preventing disease transmission. We present the results of an exploratory experiment that suggests Remote-HRI (R-HRI) studies may be a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face HRI studies. An R-HRI study minimizes or eliminates in-person interaction between the experimenter and the participant and implements a new protocol for interacting with the robot to minimize physical contact. Our results showed that participants interacting with the robot remotely experienced a higher cognitive workload, which may be due to minor cultural and technical factors. Importantly, however, we also found that whether participants interacted with the robot in-person (but socially distanced) or remotely over a network, their experience, perception of, and attitude towards the robot were unaffected.

show abstract

“…User testing is one of the usability evaluation methods where the assessment of the usability of a system is determined by observing the users working with that system [22]. Here, a representative number of end users perform a set of tasks using a prototype system, and the usability challenges are presumably identified by user observations during the exercise [23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Fidelity Prototyping for Mobile Electronic Data Collection Forms Through Design and User Evaluation

Mugisha¹,

Babić²,

Wakholi³

et al. 2019

JMIR Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Mobile data collection systems are often difficult to use for nontechnical or novice users. This can be attributed to the fact that developers of such tools do not adequately involve end users in the design and development of product features and functions, which often creates interaction challenges. Objective The main objective of this study was to assess the guidelines for form design using high-fidelity prototypes developed based on end-user preferences. We also sought to investigate the association between the results from the System Usability Scale (SUS) and those from the Study Tailored Evaluation Questionnaire (STEQ) after the evaluation. In addition, we sought to recommend some practical guidelines for the implementation of the group testing approach particularly in low-resource settings during mobile form design. Methods We developed a Web-based high-fidelity prototype using Axure RP 8. A total of 30 research assistants (RAs) evaluated this prototype in March 2018 by completing the given tasks during 1 common session. An STEQ comprising 13 affirmative statements and the commonly used and validated SUS were administered to evaluate the usability and user experience after interaction with the prototype. The STEQ evaluation was summarized using frequencies in an Excel sheet while the SUS scores were calculated based on whether the statement was positive (user selection minus 1) or negative (5 minus user selection). These were summed up and the score contributions multiplied by 2.5 to give the overall form usability from each participant. Results Of the RAs, 80% (24/30) appreciated the form progress indication, found the form navigation easy, and were satisfied with the error messages. The results gave a SUS average score of 70.4 (SD 11.7), which is above the recommended average SUS score of 68, meaning that the usability of the prototype was above average. The scores from the STEQ, on the other hand, indicated a 70% (21/30) level of agreement with the affirmative evaluation statements. The results from the 2 instruments indicated a fair level of user satisfaction and a strong positive association as shown by the Pearson correlation value of .623 ( P <.01). Conclusions A high-fidelity prototype was used to give the users experience with a product they would likely use in their work. Group testing was done because of scarcity of resources such as costs and time involved especially in low-income countries. If embraced, this approach could help assess user needs of the diverse user groups. With proper preparation and the right infrastructure at an affordable cost, usability testing could lead to the development of highly usable forms. The study thus makes recommendations on the practical guidelines for the implementation of the group testing approach particularly in low-resource settings during mobile form design.

show abstract

Let your users do the testing

Cited by 62 publications

References 29 publications

Alpha test results for a Housing First eLearning strategy: the value of multiple qualitative methods for intervention design

Alpha test results for a Housing First eLearning strategy: the value of multiple qualitative methods for intervention design

Remote HRI: a Methodology for Maintaining COVID-19 Physical Distancing and Human Interaction Requirements in HRI Studies

High-Fidelity Prototyping for Mobile Electronic Data Collection Forms Through Design and User Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About