Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
Texto Completo: | http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/55/55134/tde-08022018-084022/ |
Resumo: | Heuristic Evaluation (HE) is a popular method of usability inspection. However, its outcomes are dependent on the expertise of evaluators. This study explored and described the difference in quality of outcomes (reports) of a collaborative HE conducted by evaluator groups of distinct composition, regarding different numbers of expert evaluators in each group. Twenty-seven (27) evaluators voluntarily contributed with this study, nine (9) expert and 18 novice evaluators. Thus, I organized seven (7) HE groups according to four (4) different levels of the factor presence of an expert, which ranged from no expert up to three (3) experts in the same group. Each group agreed to provide their reports for this study. Thereafter, I conducted a comparative analysis on the reports based on standard methods of the field and on a cluster analysis of similarities. I described the F-measure for each group report according to a relaxed and a strict criteria. Also, I described the dendrograms formed from the cluster analysis and the respective similarities indicated by each cluster. The results showed that the quality of reports from collaborative HE conducted by experts and novices together can be more similar to the quality of reports from a traditional HE with multiple expert inspectors (Benchmark Group) then to the quality of reports from a collaborative HE conducted by a group composed only by novice evaluators (Baseline Group). Finally, I discuss additional findings and implications for future studies in the field. |
id |
USP_cbfdf7b74c81292ba18fdcdb1ceacb73 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:teses.usp.br:tde-08022018-084022 |
network_acronym_str |
USP |
network_name_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository_id_str |
2721 |
spelling |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluatorsAdaptações ao método de Avaliação Heurística (AH) para avaliadores novatosAvaliação heurísticaAvaliadores novatosEfeito avaliadorEfeito experiênciaEvaluator effectExpertise effectHeuristic evaluationNovice evaluatorsUsabilidadeUsabilityHeuristic Evaluation (HE) is a popular method of usability inspection. However, its outcomes are dependent on the expertise of evaluators. This study explored and described the difference in quality of outcomes (reports) of a collaborative HE conducted by evaluator groups of distinct composition, regarding different numbers of expert evaluators in each group. Twenty-seven (27) evaluators voluntarily contributed with this study, nine (9) expert and 18 novice evaluators. Thus, I organized seven (7) HE groups according to four (4) different levels of the factor presence of an expert, which ranged from no expert up to three (3) experts in the same group. Each group agreed to provide their reports for this study. Thereafter, I conducted a comparative analysis on the reports based on standard methods of the field and on a cluster analysis of similarities. I described the F-measure for each group report according to a relaxed and a strict criteria. Also, I described the dendrograms formed from the cluster analysis and the respective similarities indicated by each cluster. The results showed that the quality of reports from collaborative HE conducted by experts and novices together can be more similar to the quality of reports from a traditional HE with multiple expert inspectors (Benchmark Group) then to the quality of reports from a collaborative HE conducted by a group composed only by novice evaluators (Baseline Group). Finally, I discuss additional findings and implications for future studies in the field.A Avaliação Heurística (AH) é um método popular de inspeção de usabilidade. Entretanto, seus resultados são dependentes da experiência dos avaliadores. Este estudo explorou e descreveu a diferença na qualidade de resultados (relatórios) de AH colaborativa conduzida por grupos de avaliadores de composição distinta, considerando diferentes quantidades de avaliadores experientes em cada grupo. Vinte e sete (27) avaliadores contribuíram voluntariamente com este estudo, nove (9) experientes e 18 novatos. Assim, foram organizados sete (7) grupos de AH, de acordo com quatro (4) níveis diferentes do fator presença de avaliador experiente, variando de nenhum experiente até três (3) avaliadores experientes no mesmo grupo. Cada grupo de avaliadores concordou em entregar seus relatórios de AH para este estudo. A partir de tais relatórios, foi conduzida uma análise comparativa baseada em métodos específicos da área, e também baseado em uma análise de agrupamento com base em medidas de similaridade. Como resultado, descreveu-se as medidas F (F-measure) referentes ao relatório de cada grupo respeitando critérios estritos e relaxados de comparação. Além disto, foram descritos os dendrogramas resultados das análises de agrupamento. Os resultados mostraram que a qualidade de relatórios de AH colaborativas conduzidas por avaliadores experientes e novatos juntos pode ser mais similar à qualidade de relatórios de AH tradicional conduzida por múltiplos avaliadores experientes (Grupo Benchmark) do que à qualidade de relatórios de AH colaborativa conduzida por grupos formados apenas por avaliadores novatos (Grupo Baseline). Finalmente, discutiu-se resultados adicionais e implicações para pesquisas futuras na área.Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USPFortes, Renata Pontin de MattosSalgado, André de Lima2017-08-02info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttp://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/55/55134/tde-08022018-084022/reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USPinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPLiberar o conteúdo para acesso público.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesseng2018-07-19T20:50:39Zoai:teses.usp.br:tde-08022018-084022Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttp://www.teses.usp.br/PUBhttp://www.teses.usp.br/cgi-bin/mtd2br.plvirginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.bropendoar:27212018-07-19T20:50:39Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators Adaptações ao método de Avaliação Heurística (AH) para avaliadores novatos |
title |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
spellingShingle |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators Salgado, André de Lima Avaliação heurística Avaliadores novatos Efeito avaliador Efeito experiência Evaluator effect Expertise effect Heuristic evaluation Novice evaluators Usabilidade Usability |
title_short |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
title_full |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
title_fullStr |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
title_full_unstemmed |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
title_sort |
Adaptations to the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) method for novice evaluators |
author |
Salgado, André de Lima |
author_facet |
Salgado, André de Lima |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Fortes, Renata Pontin de Mattos |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Salgado, André de Lima |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Avaliação heurística Avaliadores novatos Efeito avaliador Efeito experiência Evaluator effect Expertise effect Heuristic evaluation Novice evaluators Usabilidade Usability |
topic |
Avaliação heurística Avaliadores novatos Efeito avaliador Efeito experiência Evaluator effect Expertise effect Heuristic evaluation Novice evaluators Usabilidade Usability |
description |
Heuristic Evaluation (HE) is a popular method of usability inspection. However, its outcomes are dependent on the expertise of evaluators. This study explored and described the difference in quality of outcomes (reports) of a collaborative HE conducted by evaluator groups of distinct composition, regarding different numbers of expert evaluators in each group. Twenty-seven (27) evaluators voluntarily contributed with this study, nine (9) expert and 18 novice evaluators. Thus, I organized seven (7) HE groups according to four (4) different levels of the factor presence of an expert, which ranged from no expert up to three (3) experts in the same group. Each group agreed to provide their reports for this study. Thereafter, I conducted a comparative analysis on the reports based on standard methods of the field and on a cluster analysis of similarities. I described the F-measure for each group report according to a relaxed and a strict criteria. Also, I described the dendrograms formed from the cluster analysis and the respective similarities indicated by each cluster. The results showed that the quality of reports from collaborative HE conducted by experts and novices together can be more similar to the quality of reports from a traditional HE with multiple expert inspectors (Benchmark Group) then to the quality of reports from a collaborative HE conducted by a group composed only by novice evaluators (Baseline Group). Finally, I discuss additional findings and implications for future studies in the field. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-08-02 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
format |
masterThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/55/55134/tde-08022018-084022/ |
url |
http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/55/55134/tde-08022018-084022/ |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público. info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público. |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
collection |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
virginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.br |
_version_ |
1815256792166301696 |