当前位置: X-MOL 学术Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Comparing Two Methods of Usability Testing in Saudi Arabia: Concurrent Think-Aloud vs. Co-Discovery
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction ( IF 4.7 ) Pub Date : 2020-08-26 , DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1809152
Obead Alhadreti 1
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT

This paper presents the results of a study that aimed to compare the utility and validity of the traditional concurrent think-aloud and the co-discovery usability testing methods. The study was conducted in Saudi Arabia and involved three points of comparison: number and nature of usability problems discovered, test participants’ experiences, and overall task performance. The results show significant differences between the two types of testing methods. The co-discovery method led to the detection of a greater number of minor usability problems relating to layout and functionality. The participants also found the co-discovery method to be easier and less tiring to perform and more natural for them than the concurrent think-aloud method. No difference was found between the methods in terms of participants’ task performance. The study concludes that the co-discovery method seems to be appropriate for identifying numerous minor issues and ensuring that the usability testing experience is as natural as possible for participants. However, the classic method seems to be a more cost-effective method, as it is equally useful in revealing high-severity problems and requires only one participant per test session.



中文翻译:

比较沙特阿拉伯的两种可用性测试方法:并发思考与共同发现

摘要

本文提出了一项研究结果,旨在比较传统的并发思维方式和共发现可用性测试方法的效用和有效性。该研究在沙特阿拉伯进行,涉及三个比较点:发现的可用性问题的数量和性质,测试参与者的经验以及总体任务绩效。结果表明两种测试方法之间存在显着差异。共同发现方法导致发现了大量与布局和功能有关的次要可用性问题。参与者还发现,与同时思考方法相比,共同发现方法更容易,更轻松,更自然。在参与者的任务表现方面,方法之间没有发现差异。该研究得出的结论是,共同发现方法似乎适合于识别众多次要问题,并确保参与者尽可能自然地进行可用性测试。但是,经典方法似乎是一种更具成本效益的方法,因为它在揭示高严重性问题方面同样有用,并且每个测试会话仅需要一名参与者。

更新日期:2020-08-26
down
wechat
bug