Free Trial

Safari Books Online is a digital library providing on-demand subscription access to thousands of learning resources.


Share this Page URL
Help

Case 19: Inspecting a User Interface > Case 19: Inspecting a User Interface - Pg. Answers_110

110 Answers 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. appropriate trade-offs between commercial value and scientific rigor while ensuring a focus on the most relevant set of issues. Inspection methods involve role play. Evaluators adopt the perspective of a specific user role concerned with achieving some realistic goal. By playing the role, they predict both the subjective and objective user experience arising from the characteristics of that role. For example, assumptions about motivation, culture, skills, domain knowledge, and application experience might all be critical in assessing the fit of a solution to its intended audience. For example, knowing that users might include E2L (English as a second language), readers might focus the evaluators' attention on the appropriateness of idiomatic or complex language. On the other hand, awareness of time constraints would encourage evaluators to consider whether the design is sufficiently efficient to satisfy user needs. Good design can be seen as a win­win solution that satisfies both the business goals of the sponsor and the personal goals of the users. An evaluator consequently needs to understand the needs of the organization to assess the fit to strategy. For example, an evaluator should not over-emphasize the lack of walk-up-and-use learnability in a design that has been optimized for efficient use by trained users. Without a good understanding of the business context, evaluators are likely to focus on surface issues such as typography and layout. Business context ensures that the evaluators also consider more abstract issues such as the fit to the user's conceptual model or the adaptation to the context of use. Hannah might use something like the template shown in Figure a.16 to analyze Stuart's input. She could use this analysis as the basis of a formal study design. Susan, Michael, Erica, and Martin would make a good team. Collectively, their skills give good coverage of the areas to be evaluated. Furthermore, they can generally be expected to be professional and insightful. Ronald's skills in design legislation are not strongly relevant to this study. Rose's standards skills are somewhat less critical in web design, and her style may be a liability. Hannah would, of course, need to ensure that Erica restrained her sense of humor when describing observations. If Hannah chose the wrong team members, the team might potentially miss critical issues, overstate problems, or write in an inappropriate style. Although the latter two problems could be