Evaluation Techniques

Evaluation
tests usability and functionality of system
occurs in laboratory, field and/or in
collaboration with users
evaluates both design and implementation
should be considered at all stages in the
design life cycle
 Goals of Evaluation

assess extent of system functionality

assess effect of interface on user

identify specific problems

 Laboratory studies

Advantages:
specialist equipment available
uninterrupted environment

Disadvantages:
lack of context
difficult to observe several users cooperating

Appropriate
if system location is dangerous or impractical for
constrained single user systems to allow controlled
manipulation of use.
 Field Studies

Advantages:
natural environment
context retained (though observation may alter it)
longitudinal studies possible

Disadvantages:
distractions
noise

Appropriate
where context is crucial for longitudinal studies
 Participatory Design

User is an active member of the design team.

Characteristics
context and work oriented rather than
system oriented
collaborative
Iterative

Methods
brain-storming
storyboarding
workshops
pencil and paper exercises
Evaluating Designs - Cognitive Walkthrough

Proposed by Polson et al.

evaluates design on how well it supports user in learning task

usually performed by expert in cognitive psychology
expert `walks though' design to identify potential problems using
psychological principles
forms used to guide analysis
 Cognitive Walkthrough (cont.)

For each task walkthrough considers

what impact will interaction have on user?
what cognitive processes are required?
what learning problems may occur?

Analysis focuses on goals and knowledge: does the design lead the user
to generate the correct goals?

An example is expanded in Section 11.4.1.

 Heuristic Evaluation

Proposed by Nielsen and Molich.

usability criteria (heuristics) are identified

design examined by experts to see if these are violated

Example heuristics
system behaviour is predictable
system behaviour is consistent
feedback is provided

Heuristic evaluation `debugs' design.

 Review-based evaluation

Results from the literature used to support or refute parts of design.

Care needed to ensure results are transferable to new design.

Model-based evaluation

Cognitive models used to filter design options

e.g. GOMS prediction of user performance.

Design rationale can also provide useful evaluation information

 Evaluating Implementations

Requires an artefact: simulation, prototype, full implementation.

Experimental evaluation
controlled evaluation of specific aspects of interactive behaviour
evaluator chooses hypothesis to be tested
a number of experimental conditions are considered
which differ only in the value of some controlled variable.
changes in behavioural measure are attributed to different conditions
 Experimental factors

Subjects
representative
sufficient sample

Variables
independent variable (IV)
characteristic changed to produce different conditions.
e.g. interface style, number of menu items.

dependent variable (DV)

characteristics measured in the experiment
e.g. time taken, number of errors.
 Experimental factors (cont.)

Hypothesis
prediction of outcome framed in terms of IV and DV
null hypothesis: states no difference between conditions
aim is to disprove this.

Experimental design
within groups design
each subject performs experiment under each condition.
transfer of learning possible
less costly and less likely to suffer from user variation.
between groups design
each subject performs under only one condition
no transfer of learning
more users required
variation can bias results.
 Analysis of data

Before you start to do any statistics:

look at data
save original data

Choice of statistical technique depends on

type of data
information required

Type of data
discrete - finite number of values
continuous - any value
 Analysis of data - types of test

parametric
assume normal distribution
robust
powerful
non-parametric
do not assume normal distribution
less powerful
more reliable
contingency table
classify data by discrete attributes
count number of data items in each group
 Analysis of data (cont.)

What information is required?

is there a difference?
how big is the difference?
how accurate is the estimate?

Parametric and non-parametric tests address mainly rest of these.

Worked examples of data analysis are given in Section 11.5.1.

Table 11.1 summarizes main tests and when they are used.
 Observational Methods - Think Aloud

user observed performing task

user asked to describe what he is doing and why, what he thinks is

happening etc.

Advantages
simplicity - requires little expertise
can provide useful insight
can show how system is actually use

Disadvantages
subjective
selective
act of describing may alter task performance
Observational Methods - Cooperative evaluation

variation on think aloud

user collaborates in evaluation

both user and evaluator can ask each other questions throughout

Additional advantages
less constrained and easier to use
user is encouraged to criticize system
clarification possible
 Observational Methods - Protocol analysis

paper and pencil

cheap, limited to writing speed
audio
good for think aloud, diffcult to match with other protocols
video
accurate and realistic, needs special equipment, obtrusive
computer logging
automatic and unobtrusive, large amounts of data difficult to analyze
user notebooks
coarse and subjective, useful insights, good for longitudinal studies
Mixed use in practice.
Transcription of audio and video difficult and requires skill.
Some automatic support tools available
 Observational Methods - EVA

Workplace project
Post task walkthrough
user reacts on action after the event
used to fill in intention
Advantages
analyst has time to focus on relevant incidents
avoid excessive interruption of task
Disadvantages
lack of freshness
may be post-hoc interpretation of events
 Query Techniques - Interviews

analyst questions user on one to one basis

usually based on prepared questions
informal, subjective and relatively cheap

Advantages
can be varied to suit context
issues can be explored more fully
can elicit user views and identify unanticipated problems
Disadvantages
very subjective
time consuming
 Query Techniques - Questionnaires

Set of fixed questions given to users

Advantages
quick and reaches large user group
can be analyzed more rigorously

Disadvantages
less flexible
less probing
 Questionnaires (ctd)

Need careful design

what information is required?
how are answers to be analyzed?

Styles of question
general
open-ended
scalar
multi-choice
ranked
 Choosing an Evaluation Method

Factors to consider (see also Tables 11.3-11.5)

when in cycle is evaluation carried out? design vs implementation
what style of evaluation is required? laboratory vs field
how objective should the technique be? subjective vs objective
what type of measures are required? qualitative vs quantitative
what level of information is required? High level vs low level
what level of interference? obtrusive vs unobtrusive
what resources are available? time, subjects, equipment, expertise

Tables 11.3-11.5 rates each technique along these criteria.