Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Performance Evaluation of Two Different Usability Evaluation Methods in the Context of Collaborative Writing Systems
Blekinge Institute of Technology, School of Computing.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, School of Computing.
2010 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years))Student thesis
Abstract [en]

In today’s world of rapid technological development one cannot deny the importance of collaborative writing systems. Besides many advantages of a collaborative writing system the major one is to allow its end users to work in collaboration with each other without having to physically meet. In the past various researches has been carried out for the usability evaluation of collaborative writing systems using the think aloud protocol method however there is no study conducted on the comparison of different usability evaluation methods in the context of collaborative writing systems. In this thesis work the authors have tried to find the limitations and capabilities of think aloud protocol and co-discovery learning methods in the context of a collaborative writing system called ZOHO, as well as the usability evaluation of ZOHO using think aloud protocol and co-discovery learning methods. The authors found various usability errors in ZOHO. Apart from this the authors also observed the two usability evaluation methods when they were used for usability evaluation of ZOHO. The authors found that both the methods have its’ own benefits and drawbacks. While the co-discovery learning method was fast enough, it was expensive in terms of human resource. On the other hand think aloud protocol method was slow to perform but there was less human resource used. Both the usability methods found almost the same usability errors.

Abstract [sv]

In this thesis work the primary objective was to figure out the limitations and capabilities of think aloud protocol and co-discovery learning methods in the context of ZOHO; a collaborative writing system. Apart from this the secondary objective of this thesis was to conduct the usability evaluation of ZOHO and to find out what makes ZOHO ineffective, inefficient and unsatisfactory. The authors carried out usability tests on ZOHO using the think aloud protocol and co-discovery learning methods. After the tests results’ analysis the effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction level of ZOHO was figured in section 7.2.1, 7.2.2 and 7.2.3 while the usability problems that make ZOHO ineffective, inefficient and unsatisfactory are discussed in section 7.2.4 of this thesis. Apart from the usability of ZOHO, the authors were also able to identify strong and weak points of the think aloud protocol and co-discovery learning methods when used for the usability evaluation of a collaborative writing system. They found that think aloud protocol testing is better if the evaluator is cost cautious or if he is looking for a detailed usability problems but does not cares about the time taken by the test. However if the evaluator cares about the test time and he cares less about the cost in terms of participants required for the test then he should use the co-discovery method for testing a collaborative writing system.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. , 76 p.
Keyword [en]
Usability evaluation methods, Think aloud protocol, Co-discovery learning, Collaborative Writing System (ZOHO).
National Category
Computer Science Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-6003Local ID: oai:bth.se:arkivex07DEC86AAC0D972EC12576B600449D84OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-6003DiVA: diva2:833419
Uppsok
Technology
Supervisors
Available from: 2015-04-22 Created: 2010-01-25 Last updated: 2015-06-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1625 kB)158 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1625 kBChecksum SHA-512
edf900292746384d4896ecd973ded18e74a7ddfefd10ad31729e59408c5db5031533e42ec1377152c562d998f07a897655e9ae443eb4e93899436b48d2711c0c
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bakhtyar, Shoaib
By organisation
School of Computing
Computer ScienceSoftware Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 158 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 220 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf