Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison.

M.J. van den Haak, Menno D.T. de Jong, P.J. Schellens

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

63 Citations (Scopus)
8 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This paper describes a comparative study of three usability test approaches: concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction. These three methods were compared by means of an evaluation of an online library catalogue, which involved four points of comparison: number and type of usability problems detected; relevance of the problems detected; overall task performance; and participant experiences. The results of the study showed that there were only few significant differences between the usability test approaches, mainly with respect to manner of problem detecting, task performance and participant experience. For the most part, the usability methods proved very much comparable, revealing similar numbers and types of problems that were equally relevant. Taking some practical aspects into account, a case can be made for preferring the concurrent think-aloud protocols over the other two methods.
Original languageUndefined
Pages (from-to)1-18
JournalInteracting with computers
Volume16
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2004

Keywords

  • Usability testing
  • Validity
  • Retrospective think-aloud protocols
  • Co-discovery
  • Concurrent think-aloud protocols
  • Constructive interaction
  • IR-76252
  • METIS-223046

Cite this

@article{456239fedea24d9c8ddb6c94c700cf3c,
title = "Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison.",
abstract = "This paper describes a comparative study of three usability test approaches: concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction. These three methods were compared by means of an evaluation of an online library catalogue, which involved four points of comparison: number and type of usability problems detected; relevance of the problems detected; overall task performance; and participant experiences. The results of the study showed that there were only few significant differences between the usability test approaches, mainly with respect to manner of problem detecting, task performance and participant experience. For the most part, the usability methods proved very much comparable, revealing similar numbers and types of problems that were equally relevant. Taking some practical aspects into account, a case can be made for preferring the concurrent think-aloud protocols over the other two methods.",
keywords = "Usability testing, Validity, Retrospective think-aloud protocols, Co-discovery, Concurrent think-aloud protocols, Constructive interaction, IR-76252, METIS-223046",
author = "{van den Haak}, M.J. and {de Jong}, {Menno D.T.} and P.J. Schellens",
year = "2004",
doi = "10.1016/j.intcom.2004.07.007",
language = "Undefined",
volume = "16",
pages = "1--18",
journal = "Interacting with computers",
issn = "0953-5438",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",

}

Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison. / van den Haak, M.J.; de Jong, Menno D.T.; Schellens, P.J.

In: Interacting with computers, Vol. 16, No. 6, 2004, p. 1-18.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison.

AU - van den Haak, M.J.

AU - de Jong, Menno D.T.

AU - Schellens, P.J.

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - This paper describes a comparative study of three usability test approaches: concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction. These three methods were compared by means of an evaluation of an online library catalogue, which involved four points of comparison: number and type of usability problems detected; relevance of the problems detected; overall task performance; and participant experiences. The results of the study showed that there were only few significant differences between the usability test approaches, mainly with respect to manner of problem detecting, task performance and participant experience. For the most part, the usability methods proved very much comparable, revealing similar numbers and types of problems that were equally relevant. Taking some practical aspects into account, a case can be made for preferring the concurrent think-aloud protocols over the other two methods.

AB - This paper describes a comparative study of three usability test approaches: concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction. These three methods were compared by means of an evaluation of an online library catalogue, which involved four points of comparison: number and type of usability problems detected; relevance of the problems detected; overall task performance; and participant experiences. The results of the study showed that there were only few significant differences between the usability test approaches, mainly with respect to manner of problem detecting, task performance and participant experience. For the most part, the usability methods proved very much comparable, revealing similar numbers and types of problems that were equally relevant. Taking some practical aspects into account, a case can be made for preferring the concurrent think-aloud protocols over the other two methods.

KW - Usability testing

KW - Validity

KW - Retrospective think-aloud protocols

KW - Co-discovery

KW - Concurrent think-aloud protocols

KW - Constructive interaction

KW - IR-76252

KW - METIS-223046

U2 - 10.1016/j.intcom.2004.07.007

DO - 10.1016/j.intcom.2004.07.007

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 1

EP - 18

JO - Interacting with computers

JF - Interacting with computers

SN - 0953-5438

IS - 6

ER -