Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Many software engineers consider usability testing as one of the more expensive, tedious and least rewarding tests to implement. Making usability testing less expensive and more rewarding requires having results that pinpoint issues in the software and do not require expensive consultants and facilities. To accomplish these goals this paper presents a novel way of measuring software usability and an approach to designing usability tests that does not require external consultants or expensive laboratory facilities. The usability testing approach discussed in this paper also permits testing earlier in the development process. One of the key elements to this technique is the use of traditional testing concepts and techniques such as scenario based testing to measure productivity and learnability of the subject. By constructing test cases or tasks to measure the learnability of the application, the developer has a way to measure the quality of both the test and the software. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1109/COMPSAC.2009.26 | COMPSAC (1) |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
rewarding test,software usability,usability testing,economical approach,usability test,usability testing approach,traditional testing concept,expensive laboratory facility,expensive consultant,software engineer,test case,scenario based testing,software metric,software testing,time measurement,testing,software metrics,software measurement,software quality,application software,software engineering,usability,development process,protocols,user interfaces,data mining,software development process,productivity,computer applications | Web usability,Software engineering,Systems engineering,Computer science,Usability engineering,Usability,Usability goals,Usability lab,Cognitive walkthrough,Component-based usability testing,Usability inspection | Conference |
ISSN | Citations | PageRank |
0730-3157 | 3 | 0.63 |
References | Authors | |
3 | 4 | |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carl Mueller | 1 | 23 | 2.80 |
| Dan Tamir | 2 | 25 | 3.49 |
| Oleg V. Komogortsev | 3 | 321 | 33.71 |
| Liam Feldman | 4 | 6 | 1.02 |