We as a group we have been set tasks to evaluate an existing system and capture the required improvements that should be made to the system through comprehensive research using the required methods to improve usability of the system. As a group we are to understand the user and capture its needs through numerous of method for example, questionnaire.
I within my group decided to evaluate the system (www.pogo.com) as it was thought to inspect the system thoroughly from which some major errors were confronted.
To check if these were to reflect the user of the system and that it was effecting the lack of consistent and comprehensive movement from within the site i considered to evaluate the system using ‘Shneiderman’s 8 Golden Rules’ .
The evaluation method constructed errors which were found are to be tested with the users and get feedback via the talk aloud and the questionnaire from which I with my group will be able to test the system and capture the user requirements
Paragraph Name Page Number
Methods chosen, why 3
Problems Encountered 3
Feedback from users 4
Achievements from the assessment 4
Conclusion/ Recommendations 5
Bibliography/ references 6
Web sites 6
Methods chosen, why
The interface that chose to evaluate and redesign, was www.pogo.com as this website was not that appealing to me and I think it needs improvements as it is aimed at a family audience.
To evaluate the system www.pogo.com it was required to test the system and check if the system had any major error or were they minor problems, in order for me to do this I decided to evaluate the system using the 8 golden rules of Shneiderman’s.
The method was used to evaluate the system as this enabled me to test the colour, resolution, text, layout etc… and I thought this method was very useful to appoint out the usability problem that the system was carry to the users.
To carry out the evaluation I was first to understand the method and then continue to explore this with the system (www.pogo.com) .
The methods used for capturing user requirements were Observation, Questionnaire and talk aloud. These methods were chosen because they were Easy to explore with the system, Cost Effective and Time Effective.
The major problems encountered during the task tests were to find the appropriate user to tackle these tasks. As the methods used were demanding a wide range of user that fitted in the categories of the novice, intermediate and expert users, it was difficult to address the needs of certain user as all categories were involved and from each users view was taken into consideration.
There were novice, intermediate and expert that took the task which was a real heap for me as this would help me redesign the interface to fulfil the usability needs.
Feedback from users
From asking the users to complete the tasks more knowledge was gained for what users expected within a website, from this I was able to point out the like and dislike. From this I also acknowledge that the users prefer their website to be attractive so it is enjoyable to use and users also like to take minimum amount of steps to complete a particular task.
The results which I obtained were very useful for redesigning the website. I found out what different usability needs were and what features users wanted to be remained on the website, and any others which they thought required changing.
From this information I chose to do a paper based prototype for my system because it was simple, cheap and provided quick feedback from the user.
Achievements from the assessment
Having completed the assessment I feel that I would be able to explain the usability of any website/interface and from this I am able to identify usability problems such as psychological problems of the system, as well as being able to evaluate any system in depth. From this assessment I have also knowledge how I would explain various methods of capturing user requirements, stating the advantages and disadvantages of the method.
If I was to do the assessment again, I would use Shneiderman’s Eight Golden Rules to identify the usability of the system, as I found them very useful both to understand and apply towards the website. I would also use the ‘Ten Heuristics’ to evaluate the website and I would have a great image of usability in evaluating the system.
If given a chance in the future to redesign the system I would choose to do a low fidelity prototype but as well as this I would prefer to redesign the website in a high fidelity prototype provided that I am given extra time than provided in my first attempt. The reason for this would be that the users would see the prototype in a low fidelity and will be given a chance then to test the system via a high fidelity prototype.
As I only had five users to complete the set task, I was unable to get different views from users to make changes to the redesign. In the future I would ask more users (maybe 10 different users) to complete at least three different tasks. By doing this, the users would experience more interaction with the system www.pogo.com and would comment more on the results they would achieve from the task, and also whether they were able to complete the task accurately, in a minimum amount of time.
User and task analysis for interface design
By: JoAnn T. Hackos
Janice C. Redish
Human computer interaction 3rd addition
By: Alan Dix, Janet Finlay, Gregory D. Abowd, and Russell Beale
Effective methodology for the study of HCI
By: J. Kirakowski and M. Corbett
Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd edition,
By: Alan Dix, Janet Finlay, Gregory Abowd, Russel Beale
Lecture 3/ Usability/Evaluation Methods/Talk Aloud/Page 15
CHI2310 Human Computer Shelley Wolfson