Interaction Walkthrough: Evaluation of Safety Critical Interactive Systems

  • Harold Thimbleby
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4323)


Usability evaluation methods are a battery of techniques for assessing the usability of interactive systems or of proposed interactive systems. This paper describes a new evaluation method, particularly appropriate for evaluating safety critical and high quality user interfaces. The method can also be used for informing HCI research. The method is applied when a specification is available of an interactive system, or when a system (or prototype) is working.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Berstel, J., et al.: A scalable formal method for design and automatic checking of user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Software Engineerng and Methodology 14(2), 123–167 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, W-H.: Test Sequence Generation from the Protocol Data Portion Based on the Selecting Chinese Postman Problem. Information Processing Letters 65(5), 261–268 (1998)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago (1967)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Graseby Medical Ltd.: Graseby 3400 Syringe Pump: Instruction Manual (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gray, W.D., Salzman, M.C.: Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human-Computer Interaction 13(3), 203–261 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gray, W.D., Salzman, M.C.: Repairing damaged merchandise: A rejoinder. Human-Computer Interaction 13(3), 325–335 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Holmquist, L.E.: Prototyping: Generating ideas or cargo cult designs? ACM Interactions 12(2), 48–54 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ivory, M.Y., Hearst, M.A.: The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Computing Surveys 33(4), 470–516 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Loer, K., Harrison, M.: Formal interactive systems analysis and usability inspection methods: Two incompatible worlds? In: Palanque, P., Paternó, F. (eds.) DSV-IS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1946, pp. 169–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loer, K., Harrison, M.: Towards usable and relevant model checking techniques for the analysis of dependable interactive systems. In: Emmerich, W., Wile, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 17th IEEE International Conference on Automated Systems Engineering: ASE 2002, pp. 223–226. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Molich, R., et al.: Comparative usability evaluation. Behaviour & Information Technology 23(1), 65–74 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering. Academic Press, London (1993)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nielsen, J., Landauer, T.K.: A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: ACM SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 206–213. ACM Press, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Palanque, P., Paternò, F. (eds.): Formal Methods in Human Computer Interaction. Springer, London (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petroski, H.: To Engineer is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design. Vintage Books, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rowley, D.E., Rhoades, D.G.: The Cognitive Jogthrough: A Fast-Paced User Interface Evaluation Procedure. In: ACM CHI’92 Proceedings, pp. 389–395. ACM Press, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thimbleby, H., Witten, I.H.: User Modelling as Machine Identification: New Design Methods for HCI. In: Hix, D., Hartson, H.R. (eds.) Advances in Human Computer Interaction, IV, pp. 58–86. Ablex Publishing, Greenwich (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thimbleby, H., Addison, M.A.: Intelligent Adaptive Assistance and Its Automatic Generation. Interacting with Computers 8(1), 51–68 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thimbleby, H.: Specification-led Design for Interface Simulation, Collecting Use-data, Interactive Help, Writing Manuals, Analysis, Comparing Alternative Designs, etc. Personal Technologies 4(2), 241–254 (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thimbleby, H.: Analysis and Simulation of User Interfaces. In: McDonald, S., Waern, Y., Cockton, G. (eds.) Human Computer Interaction 2000, BCS Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, XIV, pp. 221–237 (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thimbleby, H., et al.: User Interface Design as Systems Design. In: Faulkner, X., Finlay, J., Détienne, F. (eds.) Proceedings People and Computers, XVI, pp. 281–301. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thimbleby, H.: The Directed Chinese Postman Problem. Software — Practice & Experience 33(11), 1081–1096 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thimbleby, H.: Computer Algebra in User Interface Design Analysis. In: Dearden, A., Watts, L. (eds.) Proceedings BCS HCI Conference, 2, pp. 121–124. Research Press International (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thimbleby, H.: User Interface Design with Matrix Algebra. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 11(2), 181–236 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wharton, C., et al.: The Cognitive Walkthrough Method: A Practictioner’s Guide. In: Nielsen, J., Mack, R.L. (eds.) Usability Inspection Methods, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1994)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wixon, D.R.: Evaluating usability methods: why the current literature fails the practitioner. Interactions 10(4), 28–34 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Venkatesh, V., et al.: User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3), 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wright, P.C., Monk, A.F.: The use of think-aloud evaluation methods in design. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin 23(1), 55–57 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold Thimbleby
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, Swansea University, Wales 

Personalised recommendations