Niemand is blind voor usability. Methodologische sterktes en zwaktes van verschillende gebruikerspanels.

Bos, Maikel van den (2012) Niemand is blind voor usability. Methodologische sterktes en zwaktes van verschillende gebruikerspanels.

[img]
Preview
PDF
13MB
Abstract:The following question was the occasion fort his research: is an accessibility test is the ultimate usability test. This reports examines the methodological quality of user panels in the search of accessibility as well as usability problems. The goal is to examine possibilities to create a more attractive way to test the accessibility and usability of websites with user panels. This goal can be translated to the following research question: “What are the methodological strengths and weaknesses of different user panels consisting of participants with and without disabilities in finding accessibility and usability problems on an informative website”. The quality of the user panels is measured on the basis of four criteria. The used criteria are chosen based on existing frameworks that allow comparing evaluation methods. The quality criteria are congruent validity, thoroughness, reliability and efficiency. In addition, there was attention to the general satisfaction of the user panels with the website. The goal was to examine to what extent the user panels could serve as a measuring instrument for general satisfaction. The research was carried out using individual user analyses. Three different user panels were used, one with visual impaired participants, one with low-­‐literate participants and one as a control group. Each group consisted of 10 participants. The participants had to perform the same three tasks on two websites by using a think aloud protocol. One website could be seen as accessible and the other as less accessible. The results are structured based on the four quality criteria and general satisfaction. The number of problems, type of problems, overlap of unique problems and the performance of the tasks were considered for the analyses of the congruent validity. The three user panels found about the same number of problems of the same type of problem. The big exception was that only the visual impaired participants found accessibility problems. The congruent validity could therefore be seen as low and does not allow a user panel to be substitute for another user panel. The user panel with low-­‐literate participants scored at first sight best for thoroughness and reliability. These participants also found the most unique problems that were reported only once. This effect was considered when the efficiency was calculated. The user panel with visual impaired participants and the control group score better in respect of efficiency. The user panel with visual impaired participants was most efficient on the less accessible website and the control group most efficient on the accessible website. There were no significant differences found between the user panels in regard of general satisfaction. The user panel with visual impaired participants found the less accessible website more irritating than the accessible website. It seems that the accessibility of a website has influence on the irritation of visual impaired participants. Based on the results there must be concluded that none of the user panels can substitute the other user panels. Besides that, the accessibility of the website seems to have influence on the results. A mix of different participants seems to be the best way to find accessibility as well as usability problems.
Item Type:Essay (Master)
Faculty:BMS: Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences
Subject:05 communication studies
Programme:Communication Studies MSc (60713)
Link to this item:http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/63492
Export this item as:BibTeX
EndNote
HTML Citation
Reference Manager

 

Repository Staff Only: item control page