About: Component-based usability testing is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1342 publications have been published within this topic receiving 34130 citations.
TL;DR: Usability inspection is the generic name for a set of costeffective ways of evaluating user interfaces to find usability problems.
Abstract: Usability inspection is the generic name for a set of costeffective ways of evaluating user interfaces to find usability problems. They are fairly informal methods and easy to use.
TL;DR: Usability Engineering: Scenario-Based Development of Human-Computer Interaction as discussed by the authors focuses on the realities of product development, showing how user interaction scenarios can make usability practices an integral part of interactive system development.
Abstract: Usability Engineering: Scenario-Based Development of Human-Computer Interaction is a radical departure from traditional books that emphasize theory and address experts. This book focuses on the realities of product development, showing how user interaction scenarios can make usability practices an integral part of interactive system development. As you'll learn, usability engineering is not the application of inflexible rules; it's a process of analysis, prototyping, and problem solving in which you evaluate tradeoffs, make reasoned decisions, and maximize the overall value of your product.
TL;DR: Usability specialists were better than non-specialists at performing heuristic evaluation, and “double experts” with specific expertise in the kind of interface being evaluated performed even better.
Abstract: Usability specialists were better than non-specialists at performing heuristic evaluation, and “double experts” with specific expertise in the kind of interface being evaluated performed even better. Major usability problems have a higher probability than minor problems of being found in a heuristic evaluation, but more minor problems are found in absolute numbers. Usability heuristics relating to exits and user errors were more difficult to apply than the rest, and additional measures should be taken to find problems relating to these heuristics. Usability problems that relate to missing interface elements that ought to be introduced were more difficult to find by heuristic evaluation in interfaces implemented as paper prototypes but were as easy as other problems to find in running systems.
TL;DR: It is argued that increased attention to the problems identified and challenges discussed may strengthen studies of usability and usability research.
Abstract: How to measure usability is an important question in HCI research and user interface evaluation. We review current practice in measuring usability by categorizing and discussing usability measures from 180 studies published in core HCI journals and proceedings. The discussion distinguish several problems with the measures, including whether they actually measure usability, if they cover usability broadly, how they are reasoned about, and if they meet recommendations on how to measure usability. In many studies, the choice of and reasoning about usability measures fall short of a valid and reliable account of usability as quality-in-use of the user interface being studied. Based on the review, we discuss challenges for studies of usability and for research into how to measure usability. The challenges are to distinguish and empirically compare subjective and objective measures of usability; to focus on developing and employing measures of learning and retention; to study long-term use and usability; to extend measures of satisfaction beyond post-use questionnaires; to validate and standardize the host of subjective satisfaction questionnaires used; to study correlations between usability measures as a means for validation; and to use both micro and macro tasks and corresponding measures of usability. In conclusion, we argue that increased attention to the problems identified and challenges discussed may strengthen studies of usability and usability research.
TL;DR: This work presents data from an experiment where 87 subjects solved 20 information retrieval tasks concerning programming problems, and the correlation between efficiency, as indicated by task completion time, and effectiveness, as indicating by quality of solution was negligible.
Abstract: Usability comprises the aspects effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. The correlations between these aspects are not well understood for complex tasks. We present data from an experiment where 87 subjects solved 20 information retrieval tasks concerning programming problems. The correlation between efficiency, as indicated by task completion time, and effectiveness, as indicated by quality of solution, was negligible. Generally, the correlations among the usability aspects depend in a complex way on the application domain, the user's experience, and the use context. Going through three years of CHI Proceedings, we find that 11 out of 19 experimental studies involving complex tasks account for only one or two aspects of usability. When these studies make claims concerning overall usability, they rely on risky assumptions about correlations between usability aspects. Unless domain specific studies suggest otherwise, effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction should be considered independent aspect of usability and all be included in usability testing.