Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
110 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Usability testing: a review of some methodological and technical aspects of the method (1009.5918v1)

Published 29 Sep 2010 in cs.HC

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to review some work conducted in the field of user testing that aims at specifying or clarifying the test procedures and at defining and developing tools to help conduct user tests. The topics that have been selected were considered relevant for evaluating applications in the field of medical and health care informatics. These topics are: the number of participants that should take part in a user test, the test procedure, remote usability evaluation, usability testing tools, and evaluating mobile applications.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (1)
Citations (360)

Summary

Usability Testing: Current Practices and Research Questions

The paper by J.M. Christian Bastien provides a comprehensive review of contemporary practices and research questions surrounding usability testing, with an emphasis on medical and healthcare informatics. The primary aim is to refine test procedures and develop tools that assist in conducting user tests, thereby ensuring that healthcare technology meets usability standards critical for patient safety and effective healthcare delivery.

The paper commences by outlining the broad scope of healthcare informatics, highlighting its role in enhancing patient-provider interactions and minimizing medical errors through applicable technologies. Usability evaluation is identified as a key method to adapt interactive systems to user tasks, ultimately mitigating negative outcomes associated with these technologies.

Key Areas Explored

  1. Number of Participants in Usability Tests Determining an optimal number of participants remains a critical and unresolved research question. Historically, a few participants were assumed sufficient to detect the majority of usability issues. However, more recent findings suggest a need for larger sample sizes, especially when dealing with web interfaces and applications. This area continues to necessitate further empirical exploration to establish standardized guidelines.
  2. Test Procedures The methodological diversity in test procedures, including single vs. paired-user testing, is explored. Paired-user testing is noted for its potential to yield more robust data through increased verbalization and interaction, albeit with challenges such as increased complexity in data analysis.
  3. Remote Usability Evaluation Remote usability is dissected into synchronous and asynchronous evaluations. Both approaches offer cost-reducing alternatives to traditional laboratory settings. The paper highlights that remote synchronous methods are comparable to laboratory tests in detecting usability issues, but each approach has distinct advantages and limitations, such as the asynchronous method's potential to accommodate larger participant numbers.
  4. Usability Testing Tools The need for advanced tools that streamline data capture and analysis is stressed. Current tools like The Observer and Morae provide significant improvements but are yet to offer fully integrated solutions for seamless usability testing.
  5. Evaluation of Mobile Applications Mobile technology poses unique challenges for usability testing due to factors like varying device functionalities and the mobility context of usage. The paper underscores the necessity for adaptable testing methodologies that can capture the essence of mobile user interactions in real-world settings, including the use of diaries and logs for comprehensive data capture.

Implications and Future Directions

The research delineated in the paper has significant implications for improving usability evaluation methodologies in healthcare informatics, ultimately impacting patient safety and technology adoption rates. By identifying key areas needing further research—such as optimal participant numbers, the efficacy of paired-user testing, and fully automated usability tools—the paper paves the way for advancements in user-centered design in healthcare.

Future developments are likely to focus on integrating automated tools for comprehensive usability testing, refining remote testing methodologies to further bridge geographical and economic gaps, and understanding the nuanced requirements of mobile and context-driven applications. Increased interdisciplinary collaboration and empirical research that bridge gaps between usability theory and practice are essential for the progress in this domain. Overall, this paper serves as a crucial resource for researchers and practitioners aiming to refine usability testing frameworks, especially within the ever-evolving landscape of healthcare technology.