SEKE 2012 Proceedings - Knowledge Systems Institute

that automatically presents the usability verification items
checklists to aid inspectors during the inspection of paper
based prototypes (Feature 3).
VI. APPLYING THE WEB DUE TECHNIQUE
In this Section we provide a proof of concept by evaluating
the usability of a paper based prototype using the Web DUE
technique. Readers must take note that we only show part of
the example due to lack of space.
Part 1 of Fig. 3 shows the paper based prototype of a Web
page of the Journal and Event Management System (JEMS).
This Web page is used in the JEMS system to edit user data. In
Fig. 3 part 2 we have identified all Web page zones: System’s
State Zone, Data Entry Zone and Navigation Zone. In Fig. 3
part 3 we have also zoomed in some of the components within
the Web page zones of the mock-up. These components have
been augmented because they represent usability problems
within the paper based prototype of the Web page.
before filling the user’s country does not follow a logical order
(see Fig. 3 part 3 element B). Finally, in the Navigation zone
we encountered nonconformity 03. This verification item
indicates that the symbols used within the navigation zone are
difficult to understand. A user would find it difficult that the
“globe” symbol would leave to the JEMS portal (see Fig. 3
part 3 element C).
TABLE IV. USABILITY VERIFICATION ITEMS THAT THE EVALUATED
MOCK-UP DOES NOT MEET WITHIN THE WEB DUE TECHNIQUE.
N° Web Page Zone Usability Verification Items
01 System’s State The System’s State is naturally and
logically presented to the user. For
example, when visualizing the system’s
state the user must be able to understand
what path led him to that state.
02 Data Entry The data to be input by the user are
requested in a natural and logical order. In
other words, when inputting data the
sequence of input data must be logical.
03 Navigation It is easy to understand the words and
symbols used in the system. In other words,
the user must be able to link the
information being showed (labels or
images) with what he/she is trying to do.
We have shown the simplified inspection process of the
Web DUE technique by evaluating a low fidelity prototype of
a real Web page. Readers must note that in order to evaluate
the entire Web application, all Web pages within the Web
application must be evaluated. Furthermore, in order to correct
these problems, the prototype must integrate the violated
verification items from Table IV.
Figure 3. Example of the Web DUE’s Evaluation Process using a Mock-up.
In Table IV we present some of the usability verification
items of the Web DUE technique and their corresponding Web
page zones. These verification items are nonconformities
regarding the evaluated mock-up in Fig. 3. In other words, the
paper based prototype of the Web page has not met these
usability verification items. If we look at Fig. 3 part 3 and
Table IV simultaneously, we can relate the nonconformity of
the usability verification items in Table IV with the augmented
elements A, B and C in Fig. 3. part 3. Readers must take note
that we have shown one augmented element per Web page
zone. We will address each of the encountered usability
problems as follows.
In the System’s State zone, the usability verification item
01 indicated that, despite showing the actual state of the
system, the prototype does not show it logically (see Fig. 3
part 3 element A). In other words, the prototype does not show
how the user reached that state. Furthermore, in the Data Entry
zone, we identified nonconformity 02. This usability
verification item indicates that the mock-up does not request
data in a logical way. Asking for a country’s state (even if this
input data must be filled only for members from the US)
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
This paper has discussed the results from a systematic
mapping extension addressing UIMs for the Web. The
analysis of 26 studies from [2] showed that in order to meet
the actual needs of t he software development industry,
emerging UIMs should posses the following features: (a) find
problems in early stages of t he development process; (b) find
specific problems and suggest solutions; and (c) provide
automation or assistance to reduce the inspector’s effort.
We used these features to propose the Web DUE technique
that guides inspectors through the inspection process using
Web page zones. The Web DUE also seeks to evaluate
usability attributes in early stages of the development process
by evaluating paper based prototypes. We have presented a
proof of concept by evaluating a mock-up of a real Web page.
We hope that our findings will be useful to provide an
outline to which usability evaluation methods can be applied.
We also hope that the set of d esirable features for emerging
UIMs become adopted in new UIM proposals for Web
applications. Moreover, as future work, we pretend to carry
out empirical studies in order to evaluate the feasibility of the
Web DUE technique, and verify if the tool support influences
in a positive way in the results of the evaluation. Furthermore,
we pretend to use the results of the studies to refine the
technique and understand how it will be used by inspectors in
the context of a real development environment.
586