Partizipatives organisationales Lernen

Heftberger, Simone; Stary, Christian

doi:10.1007/978-3-322-81244-5

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Processing scheme lists the type of information and sketches the algorithm that is used to process the source information. (Card et al, 1983;John and Kieras, 1996) Webtango (Ivory-Ndiaye, 2003;Ivory et al, 2001b;Ivory and Hearst, 2002;Ivory and Megraw, 2005) Cognitive Walkthrough (Blackmon et al, 2002;Kitajima, 2005;Kitajima et al, 2000;Landauer and Dumais, 1997;Pirolli and Card, 1999) Text on links/ text on headings of the pages ProcessLens (Heftberger and Stary, 2004;Dittmar et al, 2004;Stary, 2000Stary, , 2006Stoiber and Stary, 2003) UML specification…”

Section: Checking the Relations To Usability-engineering Principlesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The latter could check applications or designs against principles of usability engineering rather than software engineering, as soon as the status of development allows the utilization of the evaluation technique. For instance, as soon as the behaviour specification of an interactive application is completed for a particular work task (typically at design time), the ProcessLens technique and tool (Heftberger and Stary, 2004;Dittmar et al, 2004) allows testing the user interface, whether it is complete with respect to task support (Stary, 2006). In addition, any user interface derived from task specifications can be tested with respect to its look and feel at design time, both at the specification level, and as a prototype generated from those specifications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Building up usability-engineering capability by improving access to automated usability evaluation

Stary¹,

Eberle²

2008

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the automated evaluation of interactive software systems a variety of techniques exists. Different backgrounds, various concepts for representation and processing make it difficult for developers (and users) to identify the proper technique for automated evaluation with respect to acknowledged usability principles, such as the suitability for the task. In order to facilitate the selection and application of automated usability-evaluation techniques, we introduce a template for structured documentation and reflection. Enriching traditional schemes it addresses the relationship between usability principles and parameters used for processing. We consider the relation of usability principles to processing schemes to be of major importance, since it not only facilitates the communication between users and designers, but also reveals ways how qualitative attributes can be mapped on to operational structures. If we could utilize that information for design, e.g., for automatically checking specifications or prototypes, interactive-system development could be improved significantly. The proposed template stems from our work in the EU COST action 294 MAUSE (www.cost294.org) targeting towards quality assessment of usability-evaluation methods.

show abstract