skip to main content
10.1145/2379057.2379097acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Short-term methodology for long-term usability

Published:03 October 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Approaches to understanding usability of computer interfaces over the long term typically rely on longitudinal studies, which are limited in scope to the period of the experiment. In this study, we explore whether a non-longitudinal, cross-sectional approach can reliably detect useful differences in usability between novices and experts. Our approach takes a "snapshot" of usability problems and behaviors across a heterogeneous sample of users, ranging from novice to expert. Our analysis suggests that a cross-sectional methodology can distinguish between less experienced and more experienced users with respect to the kinds of applications that cause frustration, frequency of use of help, and whether the problem was solved. Our analysis also suggests that the method is poor at distinguishing causes of frustration and the overall distribution of types of solutions tried. The data also suggest that three months of use of an application is the most useful point at which to distinguish less-experienced from more-experienced users.

References

  1. Jacobsson, M. and Nylander, S. (2012) Always-On + Adoption -- a method for longitudinal studies. CHI 2012 Workshop on Theories, Methods and Case Studies of Longitudinal HCI Research, May 5, 2012, Austin, TX.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jain, J., Rosenbaum, S., and Courage, C. (2010). Best practices in longitudinal research, Proceedings of the 28th International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10), April 10--15, 2010, Atlanta, GA, 4791--4794. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Karapanos, E., Hassenzahl, M., and Martens, J.-B. (2008). User experience over time: An initial framework. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08), Florence, Italy, 3561--3566. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Karapanos, E., Martens, J.-B., and Hassenzahl, M. (2012). CHI 2012 Workshop on Theories, Methods and Case Studies of Longitudinal HCI Research, May 5, 2012, Austin, TX, http://longitudinalusability.wikispaces.com/CHI2012Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Karapanos, E., Martens, J.-B., and Hassenzahl, M. (2012). On the retrospective assessment of users' experiences over time: Memory or actuality? In: CHI 2012 Workshop on Theories, Methods and Case Studies of Longitudinal HCI Research, May 5, 2012, Austin, TX. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Khanlarian, C., 2010, A Longitudinal Study of Web-Based Homework, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Mendoza, V., and Novick, D. (2005). Usability over time, Proceedings of SIGDOC 2005, Coventry, UK, September 21--23, 2005, 151--158. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Novick, D., Andrade, O., Bean, N., and Elizalde, E. (2008). Help-based tutorials, Proceedings of SIGDOC 2008, Lisbon, Portugal, September 22--25, 2008, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Novick, D., Elizalde, E., and Bean, N. (2007). Toward a more accurate view of when and how people seek help with computer applications, Proceedings of SIGDOC 2007, El Paso, TX, October 22--24, 2007, 95--102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Prümper, J., Zapf, D., Brodbeck, F.C., and Frese, M. (1992). Some surprising differences between novice and expert errors in computerized office work, Behaviour & Information Technology 11(6), 319--328.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Roto, V., and Kujala, S. (2012). Studying six months in two hours. In: CHI 2012 Workshop on Theories, Methods and Case Studies of Longitudinal HCI Research, May 5, 2012, Austin, TX.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Szostek, A., and Walo, K. (2012). Prospective Day Reconstruction method: a way to validate service design concepts. In: CHI 2012 Workshop on Theories, Methods and Case Studies of Longitudinal HCI Research, May 5, 2012, Austin, TX.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. van Lumig, C.J.L. (2009). The influence of user expertise on the usability experience: Interfaces for different users at Vodafone call centers. Master's thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Vaughan, M., and Courage, C. (2007). SIG: Capturing longitudinal usability: what really affects user performance over time?, CHI '07 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, April 28-May 03, 2007, San Jose, CA, 2149--2152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Vaughan, M., Courage, C., Rosenbaum, S., Jain, J., Hammontree, M., Beale R., and Welsh, D. (2008). Longitudinal usability data collection: art versus science?, CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, April 05--10, 2008, Florence, Italy, 2261--2264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. von Wilamowitz Moellendorff, M., Hassenzahl, M., and Platz, A. (2006). Dynamics of user experience: How the perceived quality of mobile phones changes over time. User Experience - Towards a unified view, Workshop, 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, October 14 - 18, 2006, Oslo, Norway, 74--78.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Short-term methodology for long-term usability

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGDOC '12: Proceedings of the 30th ACM international conference on Design of communication
      October 2012
      386 pages
      ISBN:9781450314978
      DOI:10.1145/2379057

      Copyright © 2012 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 3 October 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader