Overall, heuristic evaluation is better than the cognitive walkthrough for predicting laboratory results, but only for experts. This difference between methods for experts may be due to the heuristic method’s “reminding” experts to analyze more dimensions of the interface, than the cognitive walkthrough is setup to. In addition, heuristic evaluation tends to facilitate naming improvements that go beyond the scope of the tasks for experts. In absolute value, all groups’ except for the experts were quite low in both methods. These methods’ strength, more than their predictive value, is information we gain beyond this.
Źródło: What is Gained and Lost When Using Methods Other Than Empirical Testing, Posters and short talks of the 1992 SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems
Recent Comments