Abstract
Currently there are many evaluation methods that can be used to assess the user interface at different phases of the development process. However, the comparison of results obtained from methods employed in early phases (e.g. requirement engineering) and late phases (e.g. user testing) of the development process it is not straightforward. This paper reports how we have treated this problem during the development process of a mobile application called Ubiloop aimed at supporting incident reporting in cities. For that purpose we have employed semi-directive requirement interviews, model-based task analysis, survey of existing systems and user testing with high fidelity prototypes. This paper describes how we have articulated the results obtained from these different methods. Our aim is to discuss how the triangulation of methods might provide insights about the identification of UX factors.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on the Interplay between User Experience Evaluation and Software Development (I-UxSED 2012), Copenhagen, Denmark, October 14, 2012. |
Editors | Effie Lai-Chong Law |
Publisher | CEUR-WS.org |
Pages | 37-42 |
Number of pages | 6 |
Publication status | Published - 1 Dec 2012 |
Externally published | Yes |
Event | 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, NordiCHI 2012 - Copenhagen, Denmark Duration: 14 Oct 2012 → 17 Oct 2012 Conference number: 7 |
Publication series
Name | CEUR Workshop Proceedings |
---|---|
Publisher | CEUR-WS.org |
Volume | 922 |
ISSN (Print) | 1613-0073 |
Conference
Conference | 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, NordiCHI 2012 |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | NordiCHI 2012 |
Country/Territory | Denmark |
City | Copenhagen |
Period | 14/10/12 → 17/10/12 |
Other | 2nd International Workshop on the Interplay Between User Experience Evaluation and Software Development, I-UxSED 2012 - In Conjunction with the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, NordiCHI 2012 |
Keywords
- Development process
- Incident reporting systems
- UX factors