Evaluation of an informational Web site: Three variants of the think-aloud method compared

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To evaluate Web sites, usability experts often use methods that were originally employed for the evaluation of software applications. In doing so, they assume that these methods will work exactly the same for both types of test objects. However, there is a major difference between transactional software applications and informational Web sites, a difference that could have an effect on the workings of various usability methods. As such, we felt that it was valuable to repeat one of our previous studies in which we compared concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction to evaluate a Web application, this time using a Web site. The results of our study showed that in some respects, the methods did work differently depending on the test object they were applied to. However, we conclude that the three methods are largely interchangeable and that the decision to choose one variant of the think-aloud method over the other should be based on practical considerations.
Original languageUndefined
Pages (from-to)58-71
Number of pages14
JournalTechnical communication
Volume54
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2007

Keywords

  • METIS-243574
  • IR-61589

Cite this

@article{f7e861f466d74911a9d7609044ace944,
title = "Evaluation of an informational Web site: Three variants of the think-aloud method compared",
abstract = "To evaluate Web sites, usability experts often use methods that were originally employed for the evaluation of software applications. In doing so, they assume that these methods will work exactly the same for both types of test objects. However, there is a major difference between transactional software applications and informational Web sites, a difference that could have an effect on the workings of various usability methods. As such, we felt that it was valuable to repeat one of our previous studies in which we compared concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction to evaluate a Web application, this time using a Web site. The results of our study showed that in some respects, the methods did work differently depending on the test object they were applied to. However, we conclude that the three methods are largely interchangeable and that the decision to choose one variant of the think-aloud method over the other should be based on practical considerations.",
keywords = "METIS-243574, IR-61589",
author = "{van den Haak}, M.J. and {de Jong}, {Menno D.T.} and P.J. Schellens",
year = "2007",
language = "Undefined",
volume = "54",
pages = "58--71",
journal = "Technical communication",
issn = "0049-3155",
publisher = "Society For Technical Communication (STC)",
number = "1",

}

Evaluation of an informational Web site: Three variants of the think-aloud method compared. / van den Haak, M.J.; de Jong, Menno D.T.; Schellens, P.J.

In: Technical communication, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2007, p. 58-71.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of an informational Web site: Three variants of the think-aloud method compared

AU - van den Haak, M.J.

AU - de Jong, Menno D.T.

AU - Schellens, P.J.

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - To evaluate Web sites, usability experts often use methods that were originally employed for the evaluation of software applications. In doing so, they assume that these methods will work exactly the same for both types of test objects. However, there is a major difference between transactional software applications and informational Web sites, a difference that could have an effect on the workings of various usability methods. As such, we felt that it was valuable to repeat one of our previous studies in which we compared concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction to evaluate a Web application, this time using a Web site. The results of our study showed that in some respects, the methods did work differently depending on the test object they were applied to. However, we conclude that the three methods are largely interchangeable and that the decision to choose one variant of the think-aloud method over the other should be based on practical considerations.

AB - To evaluate Web sites, usability experts often use methods that were originally employed for the evaluation of software applications. In doing so, they assume that these methods will work exactly the same for both types of test objects. However, there is a major difference between transactional software applications and informational Web sites, a difference that could have an effect on the workings of various usability methods. As such, we felt that it was valuable to repeat one of our previous studies in which we compared concurrent think-aloud protocols, retrospective think-aloud protocols, and constructive interaction to evaluate a Web application, this time using a Web site. The results of our study showed that in some respects, the methods did work differently depending on the test object they were applied to. However, we conclude that the three methods are largely interchangeable and that the decision to choose one variant of the think-aloud method over the other should be based on practical considerations.

KW - METIS-243574

KW - IR-61589

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 58

EP - 71

JO - Technical communication

JF - Technical communication

SN - 0049-3155

IS - 1

ER -