首页> 外文会议>2001 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sep 30-Oct 3, 2001, Boulder, Colorado, USA >A Comparison of Usage Evaluation and Inspection Methods for Assessing Groupware Usability
【24h】

A Comparison of Usage Evaluation and Inspection Methods for Assessing Groupware Usability

机译:评估组件软件可用性的使用评估和检查方法的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Many researchers believe that groupware can only be evaluated by studying real collaborators in their real contexts, a process that tends to be expensive and time-consuming. Others believe that it is more practical to evaluate groupware through usability inspection methods. Deciding between these two approaches is difficult, because it is unclear how they compare in a real evaluation situation. To address this problem, we carried out a dual evaluation of a groupware system, with one evaluation applying user-based techniques, and the other using inspection methods. We compared the results from the two evaluations and concluded that, while the two methods have their own strengths, weaknesses, and trade-offs, they are complementary. Because the two methods found overlapping problems, we expect that they can be used in tandem to good effect, e.g., applying the discount method prior to a field study, with the expectation that the system deployed in the more expensive field study has a better chance of doing well because some pertinent usability problems will have already been addressed.
机译:许多研究人员认为,只能通过在实际环境中研究真正的协作者来评估群件,这一过程往往既昂贵又费时。其他人则认为,通过可用性检查方法评估群件更为实用。很难确定这两种方法,因为尚不清楚它们在实际评估情况下如何进行比较。为了解决这个问题,我们对组件系统进行了双重评估,一种评估采用了基于用户的技术,另一种则采用了检查方法。我们比较了两次评估的结果,得出的结论是,尽管两种方法各有优缺点,但它们是互补的。因为这两种方法存在重叠的问题,所以我们希望它们可以并用,例如,在实地研究之前应用折现法,并期望在较昂贵的实地研究中部署的系统有更好的机会,可以同时使用它们。之所以能够做到这一点,是因为已经解决了一些相关的可用性问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号