Usability report: Shared Space Application mock-ups for the M 24 release

Document type: KP-Lab internal document
Product name and version: Mock-ups for Shared Space Application
See appendix for a Adobe Acrobat format of the mock-ups
Organisers of the test: Hanna Kilpeläinen, Minna Suhonen, Tadhg Clancy, Liu Dong, Kurkov Viatcheslav, Ephrem Daniel and Helen Ayalew
Date of the test: January 28 – February 11 2008
Date of the report: 24 June 2008
Editor: Merja Bauters
Contact name(s): Merja Bauters: merjab@evtek.fi

1. Executive Summary

The report is combination of five different heuristic evaluations that were done as a part of a Usability course in University of Applied Sciences. Three of the evaluations where executed in pairs (i.e., Hanna Kilpeläinen, Minna Suhonen; Ephrem Daniel, Helen Ayalew and Tadhg Clancy, Anne Vesterinen) and two were done by single persons (i.e., Liu Dong, Kurkov Viatcheslav). Most of the students had been using the M 12 release of Shared Space the spring before (Spring 2007), thus they were familiar of purpose of use Shared Space application has been designed for. All of the evaluations followed the guidelines of expert evaluation described by Nielsen (e.g., http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_evaluation.html and the guidelines given in the class – see attachment). The heuristics used were the KP-Lab heuristics (see http://kplab.evtek.fi:8080/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=R.2.10KPLabHeuristics). The evaluated product was the Shared Space Application prototype, i.e., the evaluation was made of screenshots of the product since an interactive prototype was not available. The results will be presented as combination of the results documented by the students executing the expert evaluation.

1.1 The results can be summarised as:

As a result of evaluation, there are seven main points to report:

  • Too much colours used in application (light blue, dark blue, yellow, light yellow, red, deep green, sludgy green, black, grey, dark grey, orange, gravel)
  • Unnecessary lines and borders (against the minimalism concept)
  • Careless alignments regarding to text and panels
  • Not very friendly portal language (ex. of strict language strings in categories: description, creator, created, modified, assigned to; “object type”, “node title”, “Role: Member”, “Role: Administrator” etc.)
  • Strong technical terms for non-technical (“Object” instead of “Element”, “Panel” or even “Space”)
  • Inconsistent styles and design schemes (especially buttons)
  • Interface space loss (waste of space when it is needed for Relation view)



This page is a category under: usability and under Category Of Feedback Testing Data

Attachments

  Page Info My Prefs Log in
This page (revision-1) last changed on 18:24 25-Mar-2017 by merja.
 

Referenced by
Category Of Feedb...

JSPWiki v2.4.102
[RSS]