Graphics Programs Reference
In-Depth Information
Research Questions and Methods
Results
A first set of usability tests was conducted with this
mock-up in various settings. No virtual link was
actually available at that time. These preliminary
tests tried to examine the global user experience,
as well as the way of interacting with the system
and the already implemented functionalities, for
the sick children as well as for the teachers. Five
sick children and three teachers participated in
the study. Most of the tests were conducted at the
UZ Leuven (University Hospital) School and at
the UZ Leuven itself.
Before each test, the mock-up was installed on
a laptop computer. This computer was connected
to the portable usability laboratory of the IBBT -
Centre for Usability Research (K.U. Leuven). This
laboratory, consisting of a specific hardware and
software setup, allowed video recording of the test
user's behavior as well as capturing what was on
the computer screen. In addition, the researcher
logged all test user behavior using the Observer
software package. During the tests, users were
encouraged to 'think aloud'. In that way, the
researcher got an accurate overview of what the
test user thinks and feels. When finished, the test
user was interviewed in a non-structured way. He
was asked a number of questions concerning the
user experience or specific observations that were
not clear for the researcher during observation.
After each test, the combined video tapes,
log files and interview notes were examined in
a qualitative way. Specific attention was paid to
inter-observational findings or returning observa-
tions concerning the user interface, functionalities
or overall user experience. Finally, the test results
were translated into concrete recommendations,
to be followed during the development cycle of
the (working) prototype.
During the test itself and subsequent qualitative
analysis, the guidelines of Hadj-karim-kharrazi et
al. (2005) for usability testing with children were
taken into account.
As stated before, the mock-up consisted of a child
module and a teacher module. Both modules were
treated separately. The results of the child module
tests can be divided into three parts: overall experi-
ence, function buttons and navigation.
First of all, all test users (i.e. children) were
quite enthusiastic about the application in general.
They loved walking around in the virtual school,
although some children found the navigation not
consistent (see below). Compared with the results
of the teachers, the children were much faster in
learning how to walk around using the computer
mouse. However, as one child had specific physi-
cal constraints, it is quite important to develop an
application to which different kinds of hardware
or controllers can be connected. In that way, the
sick child can choose which controller to use-
mouse, keyboard or other-depending on his/her
own limitations.
In contrast with the expected, function but-
tons throughout the mock up were experienced
as quite clear (see Figure 1). Function examples
were: scan a document, and ask teacher's at-
tention. After the tests, the researcher asked the
child what it thought was the function of each
button. Each button was equipped with a tooltip,
showing up when hovering over the button with
the mouse. However, no feedback was given
after a button click, so the recommendation was
formulated that during the development of the
final prototype, enough attention should be paid
to feedback mechanisms when pressing a button.
For instance, when pressing the 'take picture'
button, the child should know the system status,
in order not to press the same button five times
in a row, not realizing the command had already
been captured by the system.
Finally, the usability tests showed the naviga-
tion was not always straightforward. While-as
said-the children reported the purpose of the
function buttons was quite clear, this definitely
was not the case for the navigation buttons at the
Search WWH ::
Custom Search