Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product & process
Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product & process
Usability inspection methods
The Unified Modeling Language user guide
The Unified Modeling Language user guide
Detecting defects in object-oriented designs: using reading techniques to increase software quality
Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Human-Computer Interaction
Evaluating the Usefulness and the Ease of Use of a Web-based Inspection Data Collection Tool
METRICS '98 Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics
Issues in Using Students in Empirical Studies in Software Engineering Education
METRICS '03 Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Software Metrics
Cost-Justifying Usability: An Update for the Internet Age
Cost-Justifying Usability: An Update for the Internet Age
Where web engineering tool support ends: building usable websites
Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Applied computing
Usability Evaluation Based on Web Design Perspectives
ESEM '07 Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
Validação de um método para identificação de problemas de usabilidade a partir de diagramas UML
Proceedings of the IX Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The goal of this paper is to compare the performance of two usability inspection methods that aim at anticipating the evaluation process by inspecting Activity Diagrams. In order to achieve this goal, we carried out a feasibility study by following an established inspection process. According to quantitative results, the Usability Guidelines method outperformed the MIT 3 with regards to efficacy and had similar performance regarding efficiency. However, through a qualitative analysis, the MIT 3 was considered easier to remember and to learn and also more useful than the Usability Guidelines. We found out that the Usability Guidelines method could be used for more experienced professionals on usability issues and perhaps has an even better performance. Notwithstanding, the MIT 3 method could be suggested for the use by a little less experienced professionals with regards to usability issues, supporting the formation and training of design and development teams.