Heuristic Evaluation for Usability Testing in UI Design.
Have you ever thought there are different testing methods to evaluate the UI Design? Let's see what are those.
Please refer to my previous article here for better understanding.https://medium.com/@vipparthymeenakshi/types-of-usability-evaluation-in-interaction-design-845b41f5839b.
Usability evaluation is a theoretical way to appraise the product’s usability. It is handled by one or several usability experts.
Quality and relevance of results are directly linked with experts’ competence.
Each usability expert develops own approach to interface evaluation and has own views on how deeply to investigate this or that interface element and how to set priorities.
Depending on the goals the Expert Evaluation falls into
1. Quality Evaluation
2. Heuristic Evaluation
3. Cognitive Walkthrough
In this article, we will first learn about Heuristic Evaluation.
Heuristic Evaluation— a hypothetical convenience review strategy dependent on principles of the framework’s turn of events (“the heuristics”) proposed by Jakob Nielsen.
As indicated by these gauges, Heuristic assessment is taken care of by a few (the 20/80 guidelines) specialists, who recognize building blunders depending on “the heuristics”, their graveness and effect on ease of use.
The totalled testing results are remembered for the last report, which additionally diagrams the majority of distinguished framework mistakes.
1. Visibility of system status
The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within a reasonable time.
2. Match between system and the real world
The system should speak the users’ language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.
3. User control and freedom
Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked “emergency exit” to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo.
4. Consistency and standards
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions.
5. Error prevention
Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action.
6. Recognition rather than recall
Minimize the user’s memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.
7. Flexibility and efficiency of use
Accelerators — unseen by the novice user — may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions.
8. Aesthetic and minimalist design
Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility.
9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors
Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.
10. Help and documentation
Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user’s task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.
To be Continued..
Please Check the Continuation here https://medium.com/@vipparthymeenakshi/cognitive-and-compared-testing-evaluation-methodologies-for-ui-design-9746c048aee4
