Abstract
We report the results of a study comparing two concurrent think-aloud approaches for usability testing: the classic think-aloud (CTA) and an interactive think-aloud (ITA). The think-alouds were compared in respect of task performance and usability problem data. We also analyse the utility of the interventions used within the ITA in eliciting useful participant utterances. The most useful interventions were those focused on seeking explanations and opinions; these generated more utterances about user difficulties. Requests for clarifications, particularly about actions, resulted in fewer useful utterances: participants responded with simple procedural descriptions. In comparing the CTA and ITA, we found no differences in the number of successfully completed tasks, but the ITA did elongate the test session. The ITA led to the detection of more usability problems overall, and a greater number of causal explanations. However, the ITA produced more low-severity problems than the CTA.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
