Repairing damaged merchandise: a rejoinder

  • Authors:
  • Wayne D. Gray;Marilyn C. Salzman

  • Affiliations:
  • Human Factors and Applied Cognitive Program, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA;US WEST Advanced Technologies, Baulder, CO and George Mason University

  • Venue:
  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Year:
  • 1998

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Our goal in writing "Damaged Merchandise?" (DM) was not to have the last word on the subject but to raise an awareness within the human-computer interaction (HCI) community of issues that we felt had been too long ignored or neglected. On reading the 10 commentaries from distinguished members of the HCI community, we were pleased to see that they had joined the debate and broadened the discussion. Subsequently, we were somewhat torn by how to proceed. Our first thought was to respond point by point, commentary by commentary. However, we refrain from addressing many specific issues here, as a full discussion would involve an article at least as long as DM. Instead we focus on a few important themes that emerged throughout our article and the ensuing discussion: •What is usability, how do we measure it, and what do we need to know about our usability evaluation methods (UEMs)? •Why do we find ourselves where we are? •What is the role of experiments versus other empirical studies in HCI? Are there common issues in the design of empirical studies? •How do we judge the value of a study? •Where do we go from here?