[vc_empty_space][vc_empty_space]
A comparison of usability testing methods in smartphone evaluation
Hendradewa A.P.a, Yassierlib
a Industrial Engineering Department, Universitas Islam Indonesia, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
b Faculty of Industrial Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624529070653{padding-top: 30px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner layout=”boxed”][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1624695412187{border-right-width: 1px !important;border-right-color: #dddddd !important;border-right-style: solid !important;border-radius: 1px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Abstract” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]© 2019 KIIE.A number of conventional methods are available for usability testing of smartphones, but their effectiveness is yet to be established. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the usability testing methods in identifying the problems of a smartphone design. Three usability methods, Think-Aloud (TA), Cognitive Walkthrough (CW), and Heuristic Evaluation (HE), were selected for comparison, and 15 smartphone users and 16 usability experts were chosen as participants in the comparative study. The results of this study indicate that HE method is the most effective one and has the highest severity rating. Additionally, this study finds that eight evaluators are sufficient for using HE method to find most of the usability problems. There has been substantial increase recently in smartphone sales that trigger a tough competition among the smartphone manufacturers. The usability of the smartphone has become among most smartphone users consider before buying their phones. This study proposed a guideline for usability testing of smartphones.[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Author keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Indexed keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]Cognitive walkthrough,Heuristic evaluation,Think aloud,Usability,User interface design[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Funding details” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”DOI” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]https://doi.org/10.7232/iems.2019.18.2.154[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_column_text]Widget Plumx[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]