ux sofia 2012 - diy mobile usability testing workshop

Download UX Sofia 2012 - DIY Mobile Usability Testing Workshop

Post on 27-Jan-2015

104 views

Category:

Technology

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

These are the slides for our 4-hour workshop in UX Sofia 2012.

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1. Bernard, packet coreengineer at NSN

2. Beln, interactiondesigner at Intels OTC 3. how to plan and run usabilitytests with mobile devices in alaboratory setting 4. assuming ...1. you have experience planning and running usability tests with desktop computers2. you are testing software or an interactive prototype running on a mobile device3. you are testing in a usability laboratory or similar environment 5. we will not focus on1. the fundamentals of the usability testing technique2. how to prototype for mobile devices3. how to test in the eld 6. these arethe goldenrules youneed toremember 7. let us begin ... 8. usability testinga process that employs people as testingparticipants who are representative of thetarget audience to evaluate the degree towhich a product meets specic usabilitycriteria.Handbook of usability testing 2nd Ed., J. Rubin and D. Chisnell 9. usability testingwatching people try to use what yourecreating/designing/building (...) with theintention of (a)making it easier for people touse or (b)proving that it is easy to use.Rocket Surgery Made Easy, S. Krug 10. dut vs mut 11. Desktop MobileProductsoftware softwareMobileDevice ComputerphoneContextPredictable Unpredictable Mobile phoneConnection DSL / Cable network 12. which phone?which context?which connection? 13. which phone?which context?which connection? 14. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 15. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 16. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 17. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 18. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 19. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 20. web task success rates feature phones38% smartphones 55%touch phones 75%Mobile usability, J. Nielsens Alertbox 20 Jul 2009http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-usability-study-1.html 21. handset usabilityaffects test results 22. test withparticipantsown phones 23. when not possible,include training and warm-up tasks 24. handset becomes ascreening criteria whenrecruiting test subjects 25. http://goo.gl/hmp8t 26. mobile phone subscriptions per 100 peoplehttp://data.worldbank.org 27. http://gs.statcounter.com/ 28. http://gs.statcounter.com/ 29. WP iOS Android Blackberry 30. http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html 31. http://us.blackberry.com/developers/choosingtargetos.jsp 32. do notconfusetargetplatformwith targetuser 33. which phone would you use for testing?who are the target users?handset screening criteriawill you need warm-up tasks? (yes / no)if yes, which ones? 34. BNT are considering amobile version of theirwebsite.Before investing in theproject, they would like toknow how their existingdesktop site performs onmobile devices. 35. You are working on anAndroid application forSoa Airport.Together with yourdevelopers, you havecreated a rst version ofthe app. This alphaversion is not available inGoogle Play, it is not fullytested and might bebuggy. 36. St. Ekaterina UniversityHospital has developed aBlackberry applicationthat helps nurses anddoctors access andupdate patients recordsduring their daily shift.They have asked you tohelp them test theapplication. 37. Evernote wants touncover the main usabilityissues in their existingmobile applications foriOS, Android, WindowsPhone and Blackberry.Help them organise thenecessary testing. 38. what about emulators?mas_fsx_ by Massimiliano Silipigni at http://www.ickr.com/photos/silipigni/6055803785/ 39. good for ...using an emulator enables testers tothoroughly capture user behaviour (...) Thecaptured data are generally informative anduseful for analysing user performanceChallenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications,D. Zhang, B. Adipat, International Journal of Human Computer Studies (2005) 40. good for ...emulators are more suitable to be used forimproving the interface design of applicationssuch as the layout of menu structures duringthe development process.Challenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications,D. Zhang, B. Adipat, International Journal of Human Computer Studies (2005) 41. but bad for ...using emulators alleviates the problems oflatency, inefcient input mechanisms, and thechanging wireless environment, potentiallyleading to untruthful user satisfactionChallenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications,D. Zhang, B. Adipat, International Journal of Human Computer Studies (2005) 42. which phone?which context?which connection? 43. eld vs.labIts Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006 44. eld vs.lab00Its Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006 45. The results show that the added value ofconducting usability evaluations in the eld isvery little and that recreating central aspects ofthe use context in a laboratory setting enablesthe identication of the same usability problemlist.Is it Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-AwareMobile Systems in the FieldJ. Kjeldskov, M. B. Skov, B. S. Als, R. T. Hegh, 2004 46. 01The results show that the added value ofconducting usability evaluations in the eld isvery little and that recreating central aspects ofthe use context in a laboratory setting enablesthe identication of the same usability problemlist. Field LabIs it Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-AwareMobile Systems in the FieldJ. Kjeldskov, M. B. Skov, B. S. Als, R. T. Hegh, 2004 47. according to our study there was no differencein the number of problems that occurred in thetwo test settings. Our hypothesis that moreproblems would be found in the eld was notsupportedUsability Testing of Mobile Applications: A Comparison between Laboratory and Field TestingA. Kaikkonen, T. Kallio, A. Keklinen, A. Kankainen, M. Cankar - Journal of Usability Studies, 2005 48. 02according to our study there was no differencein the number of problems that occurred in thetwo test settings. Our hypothesis that moreproblems would be found in the eld was notsupported FieldLabUsability Testing of Mobile Applications: A Comparison between Laboratory and Field TestingA. Kaikkonen, T. Kallio, A. Keklinen, A. Kankainen, M. Cankar - Journal of Usability Studies, 2005 49. evaluations conducted in eld settings can revealproblems not otherwise identied in laboratoryevaluationsIts Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006 50. 1 2evaluations conducted in eld settings can revealproblems not otherwise identied in laboratoryevaluationsIts Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006Field Lab 51. The analyses of the comparison betweenusability testing done in two different settingsrevealed that there were many more types andoccurrences of usability problems found in theeld than in the laboratory. Those problemsdiscovered tend to be critical issues.Usability Evaluation of Mobile Device: a Comparison of Laboratory and Field TestsH.B Duh, G. C. B. Tan, V. H. Chen, MobileHCI 2006 52. 22The analyses of the comparison betweenusability testing done in two different settingsrevealed that there were many more types andoccurrences of usability problems found in theeld than in the laboratory. Those problemsdiscovered tend to be critical issues. Field LabUsability Evaluation of Mobile Device: a Comparison of Laboratory and Field TestsH.B Duh, G. C. B. Tan, V. H. Chen, MobileHCI 2006 53. eld vs.lab D ISA GR EE EXPE RTSIts Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006 54. ... but they all agreetesting in the eld requires double the timein comparison to the laboratoryUsability Testing of Mobile Applications: A Comparison between Laboratory and Field TestingA. Kaikkonen, T. Kallio, A. Keklinen, A. Kankainen, M. Cankar - Journal of Usability Studies, 2005 55. ... but they all agreeevaluations in the eld (are) more complexand time-consumingIts Worth the Hassle! The Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Mobile Systems in the FieldC.M. Nielsen, M. Overgaard, M.B. Pedersen, J. Stage, S. Stenild - NordiCHI 2006 56. ... but they all agreeeld-based usability studies are not easy toconduct. They are time consuming and theadded value is questionable.Is it Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-AwareMobile Systems in the Field, J. Kjeldskov, M. B. Skov, B. S. Als, R. T. Hegh, 2004 57. testing inthe lab isbetter thanno testing 58. can you think of anexample of mobil

Recommended

View more >