Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
• Objectives
• Pre-testing assessment
– Assessment criteria
– Cognitive walkthrough
– Pilot test
• Tasks selection: Final revision
• Procedure
• Results
• Limitations
• Improvements
• Conclusion
Our objectives
• Improve usability of Google Chrome web
browser for current and future users
• Create positive user experience
Our objectives
• Improve usability of Google Chrome web browser
for current and future users
• Create positive user experience
Active mode
Internet explorer
Firefox
√ direct manipulation with the system inconsistent layout and function × low
‘visibility’ violate intuitiveness
Cognitive walkthrough: Intuitiveness
Cognitive walkthrough: Convenience
• Shortcuts
• Easy reversal of actions
• Reduce short term memory
load
• Error prevention and
solving
• User locus of control
Cognitive walkthrough: Convenience
• Shortcuts
• Easy reversal of actions
• Reduce short term memory
load ×
• Error prevention and
solving
• User locus of control
To open
bookmarks bar:
Right click
Small area of access violate Fitts’Law time needed for selection increases
Cognitive walkthrough pilot testing finalise tasks
Go to “Tools”
Task 2
Task 2
Task 3
Make and export a bookmark
Mozilla Firefox
Internet Explorer
Task 5
Locate the “Help” option.
Go to “Tools” Select “Help”
Task 5
Participant Profile & Procedures
Participant Profile
• 6 participants
• 3 males & 3 females
• 1st Time/Non-Google
Chrome Users
• NTU Undergraduates
• 20~26 years old
• Basic level of computer
and internet expertise
M1 2 2 1 2 2
M2 2 2 0 2 2
M3 2 0 0 2 2
F1 2 0 0 2 2
F2 1 1 2 1 2
F3 1 2 0 2 2
*Success rating: 0 – Not completed, 1 – Completed with difficulty or help, 2 – Easily completed
Findings
• Task 3 > Task 2 > Task 1 > Task 4 > Task 5
M1 Firefox 1 2 4 1 2 2
M2 IE 1 2 3 1 1 1.6
M3 IE 3 5 5 2 2 3.4
F1 Safari 3 5 5 2 3 3.6
F2 Firefox 2 2 1 3 1 1.8
F3 IE 3 4 5 1 1 2.1667
Average – Firefox 1.5 2 2.5 2 1.5 1.9
Average – IE 2.3 3.7 4.3 1.3 1.3 2.6
P.S. Safari is left out of the comparison due to its much lower % of use among web browser
users.
Results analysis
• Task 1: Stop a web page from loading
– Location of X button
• Firefox - Left
• IE and Google Chrome - Right
• IE
– Make bookmark: click on yellow star with a plus sign “Add
to favourites”
– Export bookmark: click on yellow star with a plus sign
“Import and Export…”
Results analysis
• Task 3: Make and export bookmark
– Google Chrome: action sequence similar to Firefox’s
• Make bookmark: click on muted star
• Export bookmark: go to “Tools” button go to “Bookmarks
manager” highlight/click on bookmark click on “Tools”
option select “Export bookmarks”
“Faster speed…”
“Stylish and simple in design…”
What are the things that you did NOT
like about Google Chrome?
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
Yes No Maybe
Usability criteria
• Intuitiveness
– Consistency
– Feedback
– Overall look and feel
• Convenience:
– Shortcuts
– Easy reversal of actions
– Reduce cognitive load
– User locus of control: error prevention and feedback
• Accessibility
Scope and severity ratings
• Scope
– Local problems
– Global problems
• Severity
1 - prevents completion of a task
2 - causes significant delays in completing a task
3 - causes minor usability problems, but users can complete
the task
4 - minor annoyance - does not significantly impact usability,
but should be corrected if time allows.
Tasks Usability Problems No. Of participants Severity Scope
affected
retain its
minimalist design
Improve on its
existing features
based on
RECOMMENDATIONS
feedback and
current usability
problems
Reorganisation of options
Reorganisation of options
Direct manipulation of bookmarks bar
Redundancy coding for “Documents” and “Tools”
option
Google Chrome
Alert window
Bookmarks bar button/options
Stop button
CONFOUNDS AND LIMITATIONS
Limitations/suggested changes
• Participant selection • Repeat usability testing
– Small sample size – in a different population
– Population stereotypes
• Asians
• University undergraduates
– Not representative of all users – reorder task sequence
– Include practice tests prior to
• Practice effect actual testing
• Testing environment and
procedure – Naturalistic environment
– Discrepancy with the real world
• Computer system
• Usage conditions
– Presence of test administrator
– Obtrusive equipment
Web browser evaluation
√
User performance test
Feature test
Web compatibility test
Configuration test
Security test
CONCLUSION
• Version tested: early stage of
development
• Minimalist design aimed at the
everyday user
– Differs from Chromium
– Relatively sound product
• Make adjustments to accommodate
users accustomed to browser giants
IE and Firefox
• Google Chrome team: make
adjustments as we go along
Google Chrome with 3D – Google Chrome Blog
– Google Chrome Beta
– Google Chrome with 3D