Evaluating Usability-Supporting Architecture Patterns: Reactions from Usability Professionals
Usability professionals and software engineers approach software design differently, which creates a communication gap that hinders effective usability design discussions. An online survey was conducted to evaluate how usability professionals react to Usability-Supporting Architecture Patterns (USAPs) as a potential way to bridge this gap. Members of the Usability Professionals Association (UPA) participated in a pretest-posttest control group design experiment where they answered questions about USAPs and software design. Results suggest that participants perceived USAPs as useful to account for usability in software architectures, recognizing the importance of the USAPs stated usability benefits. Additionally, results showed a difference in perception of the USAPs stated usability benefits between US and European participants. A better understanding of what the usability community thinks about USAPs can lead to their improvement as well as increased adoption by software engineers, which can lead to better integration of usability and HCI principles into software design.
KeywordsArchitecture Patterns HCI Usability Usability Professionals Software Design USAP
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Snyder, C.: Paper Prototyping: The Fast and Easy Way to Design and Refine User Interfaces. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H.: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, New York (2002)Google Scholar
- 4.Seffah, A., Gulliksen, J., Desmarais, M.C.: Integrating Usability in the Development Process. In: Seffah, A., Gulliksen, J., Desmarais, M.C. (eds.) Human-Centered Software Engineering: Integrating Usability in the Software Development Lifecycle, pp. 3–14. Springer, Dordrecht (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.John, B.E., Bass, L., Sanchez-Segura, M.I., Adams, R.: Bringing Usability Concerns to the Design of Software Architecture. In: 9th IFIP Working Conference on Engineering for Human-Computer Interaction and 11th International Workshop on Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems, Hamburg, Germany (2004)Google Scholar
- 6.Edwards, W.K.: Infrastructure and Its Effect on the Interface. In: Erickson, T., McDonald, D.W. (eds.) HCI Remixed: Reflections on Works That Have Influenced the HCI Community, pp. 119–122. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
- 7.Golden, E., John, B.E., Bass, L.: The value of a usability-supporting architectural pattern in software architecture design: a controlled experiment. In: 27th International Conference on Software Engineering ICSE, St. Louis, Missouri, p. 460 (2005)Google Scholar
- 8.Adams, R., Bass, L., John, B.E.: Experience with using general usability scenarios on the software architecture of a collaborative system. In: Seffah, A., Gulliksen, J., Desmarais, M.C. (eds.) Human-Centered Software Engineering: Integrating Usability in the Software Development Lifecycle, pp. 87–112. Springer, Dordrecht (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.John, B.E.: Evidence-Based Practice in Human-Computer Interaction and Evidence Maps. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 30, 1–5 (2005)Google Scholar
- 10.Creswell, J.W.: Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
- 11.Campbell, D.T., Stanley, J.C.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston (1963)Google Scholar
- 13.Schuman, H., Presser, S.: Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. Academic Press, New York (1981)Google Scholar