On the role of metaphor and language in design of third party payments in eBanking: Usability and quality

  • Authors:

  • Catherine S. Weir;James N. Anderson;Mervyn A. Jack

  • Affiliations:

  • School of Engineering and Electronics, Centre for Communication Interface Research (CCIR), The University of Edinburgh, Alexander Graham Bell Building, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, UK;School of Engineering and Electronics, Centre for Communication Interface Research (CCIR), The University of Edinburgh, Alexander Graham Bell Building, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, UK;School of Engineering and Electronics, Centre for Communication Interface Research (CCIR), The University of Edinburgh, Alexander Graham Bell Building, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, UK

  • Venue:
  • International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
  • Year:
  • 2006

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This paper describes results of a usability study of contrasting user-interface designs for Internet Banking (eBanking). Two specific interface metaphors were compared in the first experiment, linear form filling and array editing interaction modes. Terminology in the interaction dialogue was compared in the second experiment, using typical banking language and a generic, plain language interface. This research aimed to perform usability evaluation and comparison of the alternative interface designs to illuminate the development of new eBanking services. This research involved sixty-one participants (Internet users and customers of the involved Bank) exploring the designs in controlled experiments involving hands-on experience. Banks are interested in ensuring their eBanking services are highly customer-centric and that the interface matches customer expectations in order to drive customers towards this lower cost channel. The results of the first experiment (N=32, where N indicates the number of participants in the cohort) concluded that the simple form-filling metaphor, taken from the traditional paper-based procedure, was generally more usable than a Spreadsheet metaphor. In the second experiment (N=29), it was found that although banking terminology was not completely understood across the cohort, the instructional language changes did not impact significantly on usability.