Abstract
We have applied a multivariate exploratory technique called Correspondence Analysis (CA) to create and analyze a model of the dataset of experiment results. The dataset originates from a comparative usability study of tracing with the use of mouse, pen, and touch input and contains both categorical and continuous data – i.e. results of questionnaires and task measurements. CA allowed to visually and numerically assess the main variables in the dataset and how they interact with each other. In our study, pen input had the best measured performance and was preferred by the users. Touch input was the least accurate of all input methods tested but it was preferred by users over mouse especially in the conditions lacking of visual feedback of drawing. CA helped to detect that secondary effect even though it cannot be explained by the performance results alone. The importance of the influence of user’s previous experience is also noted. We conclude that CA helped to identify all major phenomena known from previous studies but also was sensitive to minor and secondary effects, what makes it a well suited method to quickly evaluate usability data.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
References
ISO: 9241-210 Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. ISO 9241 (2010)
Frøkjær, E., Hertzum, M., Hornbæk, K.: Measuring Usability: Are Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Satisfaction Really Correlated? In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2000, pp. 345–352. ACM Press, New York (2000)
Barkhuus, L., Rode, J.A.: From Mice to Men – 24 years of Evaluation in CHI. Alt.CHI 2007 (2007)
ISO: 9241-9 Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) - Part 9: Requirements for non-keyboard input devices. ISO 9241 (1999)
Zabramski, S.: Careless touch: A comparative evaluation of mouse, pen- and touch-input in shape tracing task. In: OZCHI 2011, pp. 329–332. ACM, Canberra (2011)
Nielsen, J., Levy, J.: Measuring usability: preference vs. performance. Communications of the ACM 37, 66–75 (1994)
Schriesheim, C.A., Hill, K.D.: Controlling Acquiescence Response Bias by Item Reversals: The Effect on Questionnaire Validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement 41, 1101–1114 (1981)
Greenacre, M.J.: Correspondence Analysis in Practice. Chapman & Hal/CRC (2007)
Nenadic, O., Greenacre, M.: Correspondence Analysis in R, with Two- and Three-dimensional Graphics: The ca Package. Journal of Statistical Software 20, 1–13 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Zabramski, S., Stuerzlinger, W. (2013). Did We Miss Something? Correspondence Analysis of Usability Data. In: Kotzé, P., Marsden, G., Lindgaard, G., Wesson, J., Winckler, M. (eds) Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2013. INTERACT 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8120. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40498-6_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40498-6_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40497-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40498-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)