Toward a Contingent Approach to Evaluation of WWW Site Usability: A Comparative Study B325 Research Study and Assignment Tutorial Honours Research Project for Russell Dunstan Murdoch University Division of Business, Information Technology and Law

Problem Review Design for Usable WWW Interfaces Lack of Usability processes in WWW Site development Experts and Amateurs share the same design space E-Commerce sites of growing importance – IBM, Internet start-ups Estimated 25% of all retail stock trades 1.5 billion WWW sites in circulation Super-Webmaster Syndrome 1 Person does everything!

Goals of this Research Study Research Goals: To compare a Contingent Approach to WWW Site Usability Evaluation to a Non-Contingent Approach Appropriate Usability Evaluation procedures for WWW Sites Definitions of usability based on characteristics of system User-Centred, Task-Based approach Adapted Interface principles from traditional systems WWW Design Style Guides (OHP) Implement the two approaches into a Software Tool for the Usability Evaluation of Heuristic Users – You. Providing scope to your B325 Studies!

Chooses the most relevant set of criteria for a heuristic evaluation of particular websites Utilises a priority order for criteria, based on: Characteristics of the target user group (User-centred) WWW Site purpose (Task-based) Usability Dimensions WUCET (Contingent Approach)

WUCET Usability Score

Usability Evaluation on 5 factors Attractiveness, Control, Efficiency, Helpfulness, and Learnability 20 questions in cut-down version (Original version at 60 questions and rising) Scores computed by WAMMI software (copyrighted) to produce average (median) values (percentile) WAMMI (Non-Contingent Approach) Source: (Jurek Kirakowski)

WAMMI Usability Score

Qualitative Responses Adding your personal view to the assessment of usability; and also to the software tool used to measure it. Free form comments on each tool Further development of the Software tool Provides support and adds weight to the assessment of usability for each web site using both of the tools.

Comparison of Tools WAMMI dimensionsWUCET dimensions Attractiveness‘c’ Clarity/Presentation ‘g’ Attractiveness/Annoyance Control‘b’ Hyperlinks ‘e’ Navigation Support Efficiency‘a’ Content ‘f’ Search Facilities ‘h’ Interaction Opportunities ‘k’ Download Speed ‘l’ HW and SW Requirements ‘m’ Reliability ‘o’ Ease of Downloads Helpfulness‘i’ Error Reduction/Recovery ‘j’ Help/Documentation Learnability‘d’ Adherence to Conventions/Standards ‘n’ Customisability OTHER‘p’ Integrity/Ethics Comparing the effectiveness of each tool against each other. Derived WUCET scores: attained by averaging scores achieved by respondents for those dimensions Statistical t-tests for significant difference between tools.

Conclusions WWW Site usability of growing importance E-Commerce to engage most, if not all, potential customers Comparison between tools facilitating decision whether contingent approach more effective than a non-contingent approach WUCET contributing to field of WWW site automated usability evaluation tools Contribution to ever-growing list of WWW design guidelines Questions?