Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Behaviour & information technology |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print/First online - 2 Nov 2018 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- UT-Hybrid-D
- Interaction design
- ISO 9241-11
- Usability
- Usability factors
- Usability testing
- Human–machine interface
Cite this
}
Shaking the usability tree : why usability is not a dead end, and a constructive way forward. / Borsci, Simone (Corresponding Author); Federici, Stefano; Malizia, Alessio; De Filippis, Maria Laura.
In: Behaviour & information technology, 02.11.2018.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Shaking the usability tree
T2 - why usability is not a dead end, and a constructive way forward
AU - Borsci, Simone
AU - Federici, Stefano
AU - Malizia, Alessio
AU - De Filippis, Maria Laura
N1 - Taylor & Francis deal
PY - 2018/11/2
Y1 - 2018/11/2
N2 - A recent contribution to the ongoing debate concerning the concept of usability and its measures proposed that usability reached a dead end – i.e. a construct unable to provide stable results and to unify scientific knowledge. Extensive commentaries rejected the conclusion that researchers need to look for alternative constructs to measure the quality of interaction. Nevertheless, several practitioners involved in this international debate asked for a constructive way to move forward the usability practice. In fact, two key issues of the usability field were identified in this debate: (i) knowledge fragmentation in the scientific community, and (ii) the unstable relationship among the usability metrics. We recognise both the importance and impact of these key issues, although, in line with others, we may not agree with the conclusion that the usability is a dead end. Under the light of the international debate, this work discusses the strengths and weaknesses of usability construct and its application. Our discussion focuses on identifying alternative explanations to the issues and to suggest mitigation strategies, which may be considered the starting point to move forward the usability field. However, scientific community actions will be needed to implement these mitigation strategies and to harmonise the usability practice.
AB - A recent contribution to the ongoing debate concerning the concept of usability and its measures proposed that usability reached a dead end – i.e. a construct unable to provide stable results and to unify scientific knowledge. Extensive commentaries rejected the conclusion that researchers need to look for alternative constructs to measure the quality of interaction. Nevertheless, several practitioners involved in this international debate asked for a constructive way to move forward the usability practice. In fact, two key issues of the usability field were identified in this debate: (i) knowledge fragmentation in the scientific community, and (ii) the unstable relationship among the usability metrics. We recognise both the importance and impact of these key issues, although, in line with others, we may not agree with the conclusion that the usability is a dead end. Under the light of the international debate, this work discusses the strengths and weaknesses of usability construct and its application. Our discussion focuses on identifying alternative explanations to the issues and to suggest mitigation strategies, which may be considered the starting point to move forward the usability field. However, scientific community actions will be needed to implement these mitigation strategies and to harmonise the usability practice.
KW - UT-Hybrid-D
KW - Interaction design
KW - ISO 9241-11
KW - Usability
KW - Usability factors
KW - Usability testing
KW - Human–machine interface
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056078167&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/0144929X.2018.1541255
DO - 10.1080/0144929X.2018.1541255
M3 - Article
JO - Behaviour & information technology
JF - Behaviour & information technology
SN - 0144-929X
ER -