UPA Home
     
     
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
     
 

Special Interest Group (SIG)

SIG #4: User Interface Inspections: Defining Best Practices Based on Research and Experience

Wednesday, 5:30 to 6:30

SIG outline and description

The purpose of this SIG is to provide a forum for discussing key issues with user interface inspection methodologies. Our goals for the session are to generate a set of best practices for a small set of inspection methods and discuss how various inspection methods can be combined into hybrid methods.

The facilitators in this SIG all have more than 15 years of experience in the field, have conducted many user interface inspections, and have either taught or published articles on user interface inspection methods.

Format of This SIG

In this SIG, we will examine best practices for user interface inspection methods. To engage the attendees, we will poll them about their experience with user interface inspection methods. Following the poll, we will ask attendees to describe both positive and negative experiences with inspection methods. Then we'll combine attendees' experiences with ours to derive a set of best practices for particular inspection methods.

This is a new SIG and not part of any ongoing UPA SIG.

Potential discussion topics

Potential discussion topics for this SIG (and topics that the facilitators will use to generate discussion if needed) include:
  • Do you regularly use and modify inspection methods as part of your larger usability program?
  • Are you generally satisfied with the suitability of the most popular heuristics used by the usability profession?
  • Do you employ a systematic methodology for tailoring heuristics to meet the particular needs of a system, user profile, or task? If so, what are they?
  • What inspection methods are most appropriate for examining different attributes of a product (initial learning, efficiency, consistency, aesthetics, etc.)?
  • How many and what kind of people should be involved in an inspection?
  • How much training is required for various inspection methods?
  • How do you rate the severity of problems in an inspection?
  • How can we develop heuristics that are appropriate for particular categories of products (healthcare, telecommunications, order-entry, process control, etc.)?
  • How do you find something NEW? That is, once you carry out an inspection, how do you allow yourself to see new stuff (even during end-user testing) as opposed to just looking to corroborate what you already think you've found?
  • What are the benefits of using a perspective-based approach to an inspection?
  • How do inspection methods compare to usability testing methods?
  • When in the development cycle are various inspection methods most appropriate?
  • How do you evaluate the effectiveness of user interface inspection methods?
  • What are the most effective methods for analyzing and presenting the data from user interface inspections?
  • What are false positives and should you worry about them?
  • Should you just find problems during inspections or should you engage in "design on the fly"?
  • Is it OK to combine various inspection methods into a hybrid method?

Output of the SIG

We will bring poster-size Post-It pages to the SIG and have the facilitators record the user experiences and potential best practices. The notes from the session will be transcribed and posted on a Web site. We will invite the attendees to join the facilitators in writing a short paper for the UPA newsletter or User Experience Journal.

Materials That We Will Provide Attendees

Attendees will receive an annotated bibliography of inspection articles and books. The bibliography will contain research and "how to" articles. We will also prepare a summary of best practices based on research into inspection methods and distribute that to attendees at the end of the meeting.

Background of Facilitators

The facilitators in this SIG all have more than 15 years of experience in the field, have conducted many user interface inspections, and have either taught or published articles on user interface inspection methods.

Randolph G. Bias, Ph.D.
Chief Usability Officer
Austin Usability
1707 Nueces Street
Austin, TX 78701
Voice: (512) 474-0004
Fax: (512) 474-8516
Email: randolph@austinusability.com

Since getting a Ph.D. in human experimental psychology from UT-Austin, Randolph has worked in industry for over 20 years as a usability engineer. After stints with Bell Labs, IBM, Tivoli, and BMC Software (where he created and managed the Usability Department), Randolph co-founded Austin Usability, an independent usability lab and consultancy. Randolph has published over 50 technical and scientific articles, and co-edited Cost-Justifying Usability (R. G. Bias and D. J. Mayhew, Eds., 1994, Cambridge: Academic Press), a book characterized by one reviewer as "the bible for usability engineers." He is a Certified Human Factors Practitioner, and is active in professional societies such as the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society and the Usability Professionals Society. Randolph is an adjunct faculty member in the UT Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences, and has taught undergraduate and graduate courses in psychology and statistics at UT, Rutgers University, Huston-Tillotson College, and Southwest Texas State University, plus has taught many short courses for industry. He is a vigorous advocate for designing technology to fit the user.

Bill Gribbons, PhD
7 Sunnyside Road
Auburn, MA 01501
Voice: 781.891.2926
Email: wgribbons@bentley.edu

Dr. William Gribbons is Director of the Human Factors in Information Design program at Bentley College, Waltham, MA. The Information Design programs at Bentley are among the largest and most respected academic programs in the field of information design. Bill has taught courses in design, human factors, and usability for the past twenty-two years. He is also founder of the Design and Usability Testing Center, a leading provider of prototyping and testing services for software, hardware, and web development groups.

Bill is also President of WM Gribbons Consulting, a human factors and usability group helping clients improve product usability and the quality of the user experience. Bill has worked with clients around the world on a diverse range of product designs including hardware, software, browser-based applications, e-commerce, and medical devices. Bill received his PhD and Masters degrees from the University of Maryland at College Park.

Chauncey Wilson
Director, Bentley College Design and Usability Testing Center
Bentley College
175 Forest Street
Waltham, MA 02452
Voice: 781-891-2608
Email: cwilson@bentley.edu; chaunsee@aol.com

Chauncey Wilson has over 20 years of experience as an engineering psychologist, user interface designer, usability engineer, and product development manager. He has been an HCI architect and usability engineer for BMC Software, IDX Corporation, FTP Software, Dun & Bradstreet Software, Human Factors International, and Digital Equipment Corporation. His consulting clients have included Microsoft, FEDEX, Lotus, Reuters, and 3COM. He has a degree in physics and graduate training in social psychology, human factors engineering, and statistics. Chauncey has taught courses in user-centered design for the last 10 years. He brings a rich mix of theory, research, and practice to his work. He is a past president of the Northern New England chapter of the Society for Technical Communication and the STC Usability SIG, and is a member of the Usability Professionals' Association, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, and the ACM SIGCHI. Chauncey is a co-author of "The Usability Engineering Framework for Product Design and Evaluation" published in the Handbook of HCI, and has presented dozens of talks and seminars on the psychology of victimization, research ethics, cyberlaw, usability methods, and documentation usability.