Heuristic Evaluation - Wikipedia
Heuristic Evaluation - Wikipedia
Heuristic Evaluation - Wikipedia
A heuristic evaluation is a usability inspection method for computer software that helps to identify usability
problems in the user interface (UI) design. It specifically involves evaluators examining the interface and
judging its compliance with recognized usability principles (the "heuristics"). These evaluation methods are
now widely taught and practiced in the new media sector, where UIs are often designed in a short space of time
on a budget that may restrict the amount of money available to provide for other types of interface testing.
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Nielsen
3 Gerhardt-Powals cognitive engineering principles
3.1 Automate unwanted workload
3.2 Reduce uncertainty
3.3 Fuse data
3.4 Present new information with meaningful aids to interpretation
3.5 Use names that are conceptually related to function
3.6 Limit data-driven tasks
3.7 Include in the displays only that information needed by the user at a given time
3.8 Provide multiple coding of data when appropriate
3.9 Practice judicious redundancy
4 Weinschenk and Barker classification
5 See also
6 References
7 Further reading
8 External links
Introduction
The main goal of heuristic evaluations is to identify any problems associated with the design of user interfaces.
Usability consultant Jakob Nielsen developed this method on the basis of several years of experience in
teaching and consulting about usability engineering. Heuristic evaluations are one of the most informal
methods[1] of usability inspection in the field of human-computer interaction. There are many sets of usability
design heuristics; they are not mutually exclusive and cover many of the same aspects of user interface design.
Quite often, usability problems that are discovered are categorizedoften on a numeric scaleaccording to
their estimated impact on user performance or acceptance. Often the heuristic evaluation is conducted in the
context of use cases (typical user tasks), to provide feedback to the developers on the extent to which the
interface is likely to be compatible with the intended users needs and preferences.
The simplicity of heuristic evaluation is beneficial at the early stages of design. This usability inspection method
does not require user testing which can be burdensome due to the need for users, a place to test them and a
payment for their time. Heuristic evaluation requires only one expert, reducing the complexity and expended
time for evaluation. Most heuristic evaluations can be accomplished in a matter of days. The time required
varies with the size of the artefact, its complexity, the purpose of the review, the nature of the usability issues
that arise in the review, and the competence of the reviewers. Using heuristic evaluation prior to user testing
will reduce the number and severity of design errors discovered by users. Although heuristic evaluation can
uncover many major usability issues in a short period of time, a criticism that is often leveled is that results are
highly influenced by the knowledge of the expert reviewer(s). This one-sided review repeatedly has different
results than software performance testing, each type of testing uncovering a different set of problems.
Nielsen
Jakob Nielsen's heuristics are probably the most-used usability heuristics for user interface design. Nielsen
developed the heuristics based on work together with Rolf Molich in 1990.[1][2] The final set of heuristics that
are still used today were released by Nielsen in 1994.[3] The heuristics as published in Nielsen's book Usability
Engineering are as follows:[4]
Reduce uncertainty
Fuse data
Reduce cognitive load by bringing together lower level data into a higher-level summation.
Context-dependent.
Attempt to improve recall and recognition.
Group data in consistently meaningful ways to decrease search time.
Include in the displays only that information needed by the user at a given time
1. User control: heuristics that check whether the user has enough control of the interface.
2. Human limitations: the design takes into account human limitations, cognitive and sensorial, to avoid
overloading them.
3. Modal integrity: the interface uses the most suitable modality for each task: auditory, visual, or
motor/kinesthetic.
4. Accommodation: the design is adequate to fulfill the needs and behaviour of each targeted user group.
5. Linguistic clarity: the language used to communicate is efficient, clear and adequate to the audience.
6. Aesthetic integrity: the design is visually attractive and tailored to appeal to the target population.
8. Predictability: users will be able to form a mental model of how the system will behave in response to
actions.
9. Interpretation: there are codified rules that try to guess the user intentions and anticipate the actions needed.
10. Accuracy: There are no errors, i.e. the result of user actions correspond to their goals.
11. Technical clarity: the concepts represented in the interface have the highest possible correspondence to the
problem domain they are modeling.
12. Flexibility: the design can be adjusted to the needs and behaviour of each particular user.
13. Fulfillment: the user experience is adequate and the user feels good about the experience.
14. Cultural propriety: the user's cultural and social expectations are met.
15. Suitable tempo: the pace at which users works with the system is adequate.
16. Consistency: different parts of the system have the same style, so that there are no different ways to
represent the same information or behavior.
17. User support: the design will support learning and provide the required assistance to usage.
18. Precision: the steps and results of a task will be what the user wants.
19. Forgiveness: the user will be able to recover to an adequate state after an error.
20. Responsiveness: the interface provides the user enough feedback information about the system status and
their task completion.
See also
Usability inspection
Progressive disclosure
Cognitive bias
Cognitive dimensions, a framework for evaluating the design of notations, user interfaces and
programming languages
References
1. Nielsen, J., and Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces, Proc. ACM CHI'90 Conf.
(Seattle, WA, 15 April), 249-256
2. Molich, R., and Nielsen, J. (1990). Improving a human-computer dialogue, Communications of the ACM
33, 3 (March), 338-348
3. Nielsen, J. (1994). Heuristic evaluation. In Nielsen, J., and Mack, R.L. (Eds.), Usability Inspection
Methods, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY
4. Nielsen, Jakob (1994). Usability Engineering. San Diego: Academic Press. pp. 115148. ISBN 0-12-
518406-9.
5. Gerhardt-Powals, Jill (1996). "Cognitive engineering principles for enhancing human - computer
performance". International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 8 (2): 189211.
doi:10.1080/10447319609526147 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F10447319609526147).
6. Heuristic Evaluation - Usability Methods What is a heuristic evaluation? (http://usability.gov/methods/t
est_refine/heuristic.html#WhatisaHeuristicEvaluation) Usability.gov
7. Jeff Sauro. "Whats the difference between a Heuristic Evaluation and a Cognitive Walkthrough?" (http://
www.measuringusability.com/blog/he-cw.php). MeasuringUsability.com.
Further reading
Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., D., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (3rd ed.). Harlow,
England: Pearson Education Limited. p324
Gerhardt-Powals, Jill (1996). Cognitive Engineering Principles for Enhancing Human-Computer
Performance. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 8(2), 189-21
Hvannberg, E., Law, E., & Lrusdttir, M. (2007) Heuristic Evaluation: Comparing Ways of Finding and
Reporting Usability Problems, Interacting with Computers, 19 (2), 225-240
Nielsen, J. and Mack, R.L. (eds) (1994). Usability Inspection Methods, John Wiley & Sons Inc
External links
Jakob Nielsen's introduction to Heuristic Evaluation (http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/) - Including
fundamental points, methodologies and benefits.
Alternate First Principles (Tognazzini) (http://www.asktog.com/basics/firstPrinciples.html) - Including
Jakob Nielsen's ten rules of thumb
Heuristic Evaluation at Usability.gov (http://www.usability.gov/methods/test_refine/heuristic.html)
Heuristic Evaluation in the RKBExplorer (http://www.rkbexplorer.com/explorer/#display=mechanism%2
D{http://resex.rkbexplorer.com/id/resilience-mechanism-4331d919})
Remote (online) Heuristic Evaluation Tool (http://www.usabilitest.com/features/Heuristic_Evaluation) at
usabiliTEST.com.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heuristic_evaluation&oldid=775971489"