skip to main content
10.1145/3592813.3592923acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbsiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Tuhm: A Tool for Supporting Usability Tests on Mobile Applications

Published:26 June 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Context: A heuristic evaluation is an investigation method used by practitioners to perform usability tests on interfaces. Problem: Notwithstanding the importance of a heuristic evaluation in the execution of usability tests, it is a lengthy process that requires practitioners to explore all parts of a system with critical and meticulous attention to detail. Solution: This work proposes the development of a tool called Tuhm to support practitioners in the execution of heuristic evaluations on mobile applications. IS Theory: Design Theory relates to the heuristic evaluation of the development process of systems and Software Systems Theory relates to the ethical aspect of tools. Method: A validation study was conducted in which specialists were divided into two groups to evaluate a given application using Tuhm. One group used Tuhm during evaluation, and the other group performed the manual analysis of the application. Summary of Results: Our findings reveal that Tuhm made the evaluation process faster and more objective. In addition, it is easy to use, having a fast data entry format and an organized categorization of the problems found. Contributions and Impact in the IS area: Our findings also revealed a difficulty for specialists in reading the set of usability heuristics, as it is an overlong set. Therefore, it was identified the need for improving the presentation of the usability heuristics.

References

  1. Carmelo Ardito, Rosa Lanzilotti, Paolo Buono, and Antonio Piccinno. 2006. A tool to support usability inspection. In Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces, AVI 2006, Venezia, Italy, May 23-26, 2006. ACM Press, 10.1145/1133265.1133322, 278–281.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Luca Ardito, Riccardo Coppola, Giovanni Malnati, and Marco Torchiano. 2020. Effectiveness of Kotlin vs. Java in android app development tasks. Inf. Softw. Technol. 127 (2020), 106374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106374Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Janne Bergman and Janne Vainio. 2010. Interacting with the flow. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, Mobile HCI(ACM International Conference Proceeding Series). ACM, 10.1145/1851600.1851641, 249–252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ruyther Parente da Costa and Edna Dias Canedo. 2019. A Set of Usability Heuristics for Mobile Applications. In HCI (1)(Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11566). Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22646-6_13, 180–193.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Ruyther Parente da Costa, Edna Dias Canedo, Rafael Timóteo de Sousa Júnior, Robson de Oliveira Albuquerque, and Luis Javier García-Villalba. 2019. Set of Usability Heuristics for Quality Assessment of Mobile Applications on Smartphones. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 116145–116161. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2910778Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Walter Lucas Monteiro de Mendonça, Pedro Henrique Teixeira Costa, Emille Catarine Rodrigues Cançado, Fernanda Lima, Edna Dias Canedo, Rodrigo Bonifácio, and Luis Henrique Vieira Amaral. 2020. From Dusk till Dawn: Reflections on the Impact of COVID-19 on theDevelopment Practices of a R & D Project. In SBES ’20: 34th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering. ACM, 10.1145/3422392.3422446, 596–605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Google. 2021. Android developers. https://developer.android.com/ accessed on 09/08/2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Rodolfo Inostroza, Cristian Rusu, Silvana Roncagliolo, and Cristhy Jiménez Granizo. 2012. Usability Heuristics Validation through Empirical Evidences: A Touchscreen-Based Mobile Devices Proposal. In 31st International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society, SCCC 2012, Valparaíso, Chile. IEEE Computer Society, 10.1109/SCCC.2012.15, 60–68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Sung Woo Kim, Han Kyung Jo, and Da Yun Ha. 2011. Different UI, Same UX: A Design Concept for Implementing a Locally-Optimized and Globally-Unified User Experience. In First International Conference, DUXU 2011, Held as Part of HCI International, Proceedings, Part II(Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6770). Springer, 10.1007/978-3-642-21708-1_50, 440–448.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Zoltan A. Kocsis and Jerry Swan. 2017. Dependency Injection for Programming by Optimization. CoRR abs/1707.04016 (2017), 1–16. http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.04016Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Young Seok Lee, Sang W. Hong, Tonya L. Smith-Jackson, Maury A. Nussbaum, and Kei Tomioka. 2006. Systematic evaluation methodology for cell phone user interfaces. Interact. Comput. 18, 2 (2006), 304–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2005.04.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Jakob Nielsen. 1992. Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1992, Monterey, CA, USA, May 3-7, 1992, Proceedings. ACM, 10.1145/142750.142834, 373–380.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, 10.1109/2.121503.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Usability inspection methods. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. ACM, 10.1145/259963.260531, 413–414.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Jakob Nielsen and Rolf Molich. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1990, Proceedings. ACM, 10.1145/97243.97281, 249–256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Janne Yukiko Y. Oeiras, David Leonardo M. Bentolila, and Mayara Costa Figueiredo. 2008. Heva: uma ferramenta de suporte à avaliação heurística para sistemas web. In IHC(ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, Vol. 378). ACM, 978-85-7669-203-4, 136–145.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Mouad E. L. Omari, Mohammed Erramdani, and Abdelkader Rhouati. 2020. Getting Model of MVVM Pattern from UML Profile. Int. J. Recent Contributions Eng. Sci. IT 8, 1 (2020), 36–47.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Rafael Marcus da Costa Patrono. 2019. MHET: um aplicativo móvel para avaliação de websites utilizando o método de avaliação heurística.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto 1 (2019), 1–39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Luis Rivero and Tayana Conte. 2012. Using the Results from a Systematic Mapping Extension to Define a Usability Inspection Method for Web Applications. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering & Knowledge Engineering (SEKE’2012). Knowledge Systems Institute Graduate School, 1-891706-31-4, 582–587.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Luis Rivero, Davi Viana, and Tayana Conte. 2013. Mockup DUE: Uma Ferramenta de Apoio ao Processo de Inspeção de Usabilidade de Mockups de Aplicações Web. In IX Workshop Anual do MPS (WAMPS 2013). IX Workshop Anual do MPS (WAMPS 2013), 1–8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294580666_Mockup_DUE_Uma_ Ferramenta_de_Apoio_ao_Processo_de_Inspecao_de_Usabilidade_de_Mockups_de _Aplicacoes_WebGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Kalpna Sagar and Anju Saha. 2017. A systematic review of software usability studies. International Journal of Information Technology 14 (11 Dec 2017), 1–24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Francis Santos, Glívia Barbosa, Ismael Silva, and Flávio Coutinho. 2017. THEM: Ferramenta colaborativa para suporte a avaliações de interfaces baseadas na Avaliação Heurística. In Anais do XIV Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas Colaborativos (São Paulo). SBC, 10.5753/sbsc.2017.9954, 110–124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Paula Alexandra Silva, Kelly Holden, and Phillip Jordan. 2015. Towards a List of Heuristics to Evaluate Smartphone Apps Targeted at Older Adults: A Study with Apps that Aim at Promoting Health and Well-Being. In 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS. IEEE Computer Society, 10.1109/HICSS.2015.390, 3237–3246.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Christian Zeidler, Christian Kittl, and Otto Petrovic. 2008. An integrated product development process for mobile software. Int. J. Mob. Commun. 6, 3 (2008), 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2008.017515Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Tuhm: A Tool for Supporting Usability Tests on Mobile Applications

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          SBSI '23: Proceedings of the XIX Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
          May 2023
          490 pages

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 26 June 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate181of557submissions,32%
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)30
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format