Comparison of usability evaluation methods
Evaluation Method | Evaluation Method Type | Applicable Stages | Description | Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Think aloud protocol | Testing | Design, coding, testing and release of application | Participants in testing express their thoughts on the application while executing set tasks |
|
|
Remote Usability testing | Testing | Design, coding, testing and release of application | The experimenter does not directly observe the users while they use the application though activity may be recorded for subsequent viewing |
|
|
Focus groups | Inquiry | Testing and release of application | A moderator guides a discussion with a group of users of the application |
|
|
Interviews | Inquiry | Design, coding, testing and release of application | The users are interviewed to find out about their experience and expectations |
|
|
Cognitive walkthrough | Inspection | Design, coding, testing and release of application | A team of evaluators walk through the application discussing usability issues through the use of a paper prototype or a working prototype |
|
|
Pluralistic walkthrough | Inspection | Design | A team of users, usability engineers and product developers review the usability of the paper prototype of the application |
|
|
Source: Genise, Pauline. “Usability Evaluation: Methods and Techniques: Version 2.0” August 28, 2002. University of Texas.
See also
- Usability inspection
- Exploring two methods of usability testing: concurrent versus retrospective think-aloud protocols
- Partial concurrent thinking aloud
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 12/30/2012. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.