observing
play

OBSERVING INTERACTION human-computer interaction CSE 440 WINTER - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Maya Cakmak, Matt Kay, Brad Jacobson, King Xia EVALUATION: OBSERVING INTERACTION human-computer interaction CSE 440 WINTER 2015 University of FEB 12 - WEEK 6 - THURSDAY Washington Today Evaluation Heuristic evaluation recap and


  1. Maya Cakmak, Matt Kay, Brad Jacobson, King Xia EVALUATION: OBSERVING INTERACTION human-computer interaction CSE 440 WINTER 2015 University of FEB 12 - WEEK 6 - THURSDAY Washington

  2. Today •Evaluation –Heuristic evaluation recap and reflection –Observing interaction •Presentation feedback Tomorrow (section): •Usability testing checkin: Bring your paper prototypes! University of 2 Washington

  3. Heuristic evaluation expert get information from the user University of 3 Washington

  4. Heuristic evaluation •Have evaluators go through the UI twice •Ask them to see if it complies with heuristics –note where it doesn’t & say why •Combine the findings from 3 to 5 evaluators •Have evaluators independently rate severity University of 4 Washington

  5. Nielsen’s heuristics • Visibility of system status • Match between system and the real world • User control and freedom • Consistency and standards • Error prevention • Recognition rather than recall • Flexibility and efficiency of use • Aesthetic and minimalist design • Help recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors • Help and documentation University of 5 Washington

  6. University of 6 Washington

  7. University of 7 Washington

  8. University of 8 Washington

  9. University of 9 Washington

  10. University of 10 Washington

  11. University of 11 Washington

  12. University of 12 Washington

  13. Bill Moggridge University of 13 Washington

  14. Heuristic User -vs- evaluation testing University of 14 Washington

  15. Heuristic User -vs- evaluation testing Much faster Doesn’t require University of 14 Washington

  16. Heuristic User -vs- evaluation testing Much faster Doesn’t require interpreting user actions Far more accurate University of 14 Washington

  17. Heuristic User -vs- evaluation testing Much faster Doesn’t require interpreting user actions Far more accurate University of 14 Washington

  18. Heuristic User -vs- evaluation testing Much faster Doesn’t require interpreting user actions Far more accurate Combine two methods! University of 14 Washington

  19. OBSERVING INTERACTION University of Washington

  20. Evaluation Techniques (re-cap) •Asking users –Questionnaires, interviews, focus groups •Observing users –Passive observation, think-aloud protocol, ethnography, empirical user studies •Make users observe themselves –Diaries, experience sampling •Ask experts –Heuristic evaluation, cognitive walkthrough University of 16 Washington

  21. Evaluation Techniques (re-cap) •Asking users –Questionnaires, interviews, focus groups •Observing users –Passive observation, think-aloud protocol, ethnography, empirical user studies •Make users observe themselves –Diaries, experience sampling •Ask experts –Heuristic evaluation, cognitive walkthrough University of 16 Washington

  22. Evaluation Techniques (re-cap) •Asking users –Questionnaires, interviews, focus groups •Observing users –Passive observation, think-aloud protocol, ethnography, empirical user studies •Make users observe themselves –Diaries, experience sampling •Ask experts –Heuristic evaluation, cognitive walkthrough University of 16 Washington

  23. What to measure or observe? ...at what granularity? Behavioral (objective) Data Source Attitudinal (subjective) Data type Qualitative Quantitative (direct) (indirect) University of 17 Washington

  24. What to measure or observe? ...at what granularity? Behavioral (objective) Data Source Attitudinal (subjective) Data type Qualitative Quantitative (direct) (indirect) Depends on your goal! University of 17 Washington

  25. User Satisfaction vs. Performance Metrics University of 18 Washington

  26. Methods for observing interaction hmmmm blah blah blah bla Passive observation Think-aloud protocol Comparative study University of 19 Washington

  27. Methods for observing interaction hmmmm blah blah blah bla Passive observation Think-aloud protocol Comparative study University of 20 Washington

  28. Use case: “If this then that” University of 21 Washington

  29. Passive observation 1 2 Behavioral (objective) Data Source 3 4 Attitudinal (subjective) Data type Qualitative Quantitative (direct) (indirect) University of 22 Washington

  30. Exercise •Get in pairs –one person is the observer –the other is the participant •Participant task: Write a recipe that sends you an email everyday at 9pm to tell you tomorrow’s weather •Observer: Observe, take notes, and ask questions at the end University of 23 Washington

  31. Methods for observing interaction hmmmm blah blah blah bla Passive observation Think-aloud protocol Comparative study University of 24 Washington

  32. Think-aloud "Thinking aloud may be the single most valuable usability engineering method." J. Nielsen University of 25 Washington

  33. Explaining the think-aloud University of 26 Washington

  34. Explaining the think-aloud • We have found that we get a great deal of information from these informal tests if we ask people to think aloud as they work through the exercises. University of 26 Washington

  35. Explaining the think-aloud • We have found that we get a great deal of information from these informal tests if we ask people to think aloud as they work through the exercises. • It may be a bit awkward at first, but it's really very easy once you get used to it. University of 26 Washington

  36. Explaining the think-aloud • We have found that we get a great deal of information from these informal tests if we ask people to think aloud as they work through the exercises. • It may be a bit awkward at first, but it's really very easy once you get used to it. • All you do is speak your thoughts as you work. University of 26 Washington

  37. Explaining the think-aloud • We have found that we get a great deal of information from these informal tests if we ask people to think aloud as they work through the exercises. • It may be a bit awkward at first, but it's really very easy once you get used to it. • All you do is speak your thoughts as you work. • If you forget to think aloud, I'll remind you to keep talking. University of 26 Washington

  38. Explaining the think-aloud • We have found that we get a great deal of information from these informal tests if we ask people to think aloud as they work through the exercises. • It may be a bit awkward at first, but it's really very easy once you get used to it. • All you do is speak your thoughts as you work. • If you forget to think aloud, I'll remind you to keep talking. • Would you like me to demonstrate? University of 26 Washington

  39. Think-aloud observation 1 2 Behavioral (objective) Data Source 3 4 Attitudinal (subjective) Data type Qualitative Quantitative (direct) (indirect) University of 27 Washington

  40. Exercise •Get in pairs –one person is the observer –the other is the participant •Participant task: Write a recipe that sends you an email when a new listing for “mountain bike, seattle” is posted on Craigslist. Think aloud! •Observer: Observe, take notes, and ask questions at the end University of 28 Washington

  41. Methods for observing interaction hmmmm blah blah blah bla Passive observation Think-aloud protocol Comparative study University of 29 Washington

  42. A/B testing Key performance indicators? University of 30 Washington

  43. A/B testing Recommendations based on cart content? Pro: cross-sell more items Con: distract people at check out University of 31 Washington

  44. A/B testing Recommendations based on cart content? Pro: cross-sell more items Con: distract people at check out Highest Paid Person’s Opinion “Stop the project!” University of 31 Washington

  45. A/B testing Recommendations based on cart content? Pro: cross-sell more items Con: distract people at check out Highest Paid Person’s Opinion “Stop the project!” Simple experiment was run, wildly successful University of 31 Washington

  46. A/B testing University of 32 Washington

  47. What is being compared? “conditions” University of 33 Washington

  48. What is being compared? interval Continuous values Independent variable ordinal Ordered discrete values categorical Unordered discrete values “conditions” University of 33 Washington

  49. Comparative observation 1 2 Behavioral (objective) Data Source 3 4 Attitudinal (subjective) Data type Qualitative Quantitative (direct) (indirect) University of 34 Washington

  50. PRESENTATION FEEDBACK University of Washington

  51. Timing •8 minutes is very short •Plan the timing ahead •Practice, practice, practice University of 36 Washington

  52. Nerves •Even Obama gets nervous before a speech •More severe at the beginning –Think about exactly what to say on the first few slides •Practice, practice, practice University of 37 Washington

  53. Respecting other presenters •When someone is presenting, put your phones and laptops away •Presented in class, did not come to section :-( University of 38 Washington

Recommend


More recommend