Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usability Evaluation as Idea Generation

  • Chapter
Maturing Usability

Part of the book series: Human-Computer Interaction Series ((HCIS))

Abstract

This chapter discusses how to understand the purpose of formative usability evaluation. We raise concerns about common ways of understanding usability evaluation, and propose a complementary view of usability evaluation as idea generation. Implications of this view for researchers and practitioners are discussed, and it is argued that seeing usability evaluation as idea generation may help move research in evaluation methods forward. In addition, we suggest practitioners some benefits of viewing their work as idea generation and some concrete techniques based on this view.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Lazenby, H., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Review, 29, 1154–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R.W., Allan, R.W., & Raiello, P. (1992). Usability testing vs. heuristic evaluation: a head-to-head comparison. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting (pp. 409–413).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R.T. (1989). Creativity: what are we to measure? In Glover, J.A., Ronning R.R., & Reynolds, C.R. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–32). New York, NY: Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cockton, G., Lavery, D., & Woolrych, A. (2003a). Inspection-based evaluations. In Jacko, J.A., & Sears, A. (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook (pp. 1118–1138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockton, G., Woolrych, A., Hall, L., & Hindmarch, M. (2003b). Changing analysts’ tunes: the surprising impact of a new instrument for usability inspection method assessment. In Proceedings of People and Computers XVII: Designing for Society (pp. 145–162). Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couger, J.D., Higgins, L.F., & McIntyre, S.C. (1993). (Un)structured creativity in information systems organizations. MIS Quarterly, 375–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bono, E. (1994). Creativity and quality. Quality Management in Health Care, 2, 3, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bono, E. (2000). Six thinking hats. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dix, A., Finaly, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction. Harlow, England: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumas, J., Molich, R., & Jefferies, R. (2004). Describing usability problems: are we sending the right message? Interactions, 4, 24–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumas, J., & Redish, J. (1999). A practical guide to usability testing. (2nd ed.) intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumas, J. S. (2003). User-based Evaluations. In Jacko JA & Sears A (Eds.), the human-computer interaction handbook (pp. 1093–1117). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elam, J.C., & Mead, M. (1990). Can software influence creativity? Information Systems Research, 1, 1, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1994). Creating minds. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, M., Taylor, N., & Dennis, A. (2001). Research report: modifying paradigms – individual differences, creativity techniques, and exposure to ideas in group idea generation. Information Systems Research, 12, 3, 322–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J.W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, W.D., & Salzman, M.C. (1998). Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human-Computer Interaction, 13(3), 203–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartson, H. R., Andre, T.S., & Williges, R.C. (2001). Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 13, 4, 373–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User experience – a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25, 2, 91–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornbæk, K., & Frøkjær, E. (2005). Comparing usability problems and redesign proposals as input to practical systems development. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 391–400). New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornbæk, K., & Stage, J. (2006). Special issue on the interplay between usability evaluation and user interaction design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 21, 5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornbæk, K., & Frøkjær, E. (2002). Evaluating user interfaces with metaphors of human thinking. In Proceedings of 7th ERCIM Workshop “User Interfaces for All”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2615 (pp. 486–507). Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornbæk, K., & Frøkjær, E. (2004). Usability inspection by metaphors of human thinking compared to heuristic evaluation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 3, 357–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P.W., & Messick, S. (1965). The person, the product, and the response: conceptual problems in the assessment of creativity. Journal of Personality, 33, 309–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. Henry Holt & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, B.E., & Marks, S.J. (1997). Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods. Behaviour & Information Technology, 16, 4/5, 188–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karat, J. (1998). User-centered software evaluation methodologies. In M. Helander, T.K. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 689–704). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, K., & Wagner, C. (1994). Stimulating ideas through creativity software, Management Science, 40, 11, 1514–1532.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Malaga, R.A. (2000). The effect of stimulus modes and associative distance in individual creativity support systems. Decision Support Systems, 29, 2, 125–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marakas, G.M., & Elam, J.J. (1997). Creativity enhancement in problem solving: through software or process? Management Science, 43, 8, 1136–1146.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Massetti, B. (1996). An empirical examination of the value of creativity support systems on idea generation. MIS Quarterly, 20, 1, 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 3, 229–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, R. (1981). Ideational fluency as a predictor of original problem solving. Journal of Education Technology, 73, 4, 568–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molich, R., Ede, M.R., Kaasgaard, K., & Karyukin, B. (2004). Comparative usability evaluation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23, 1, 65–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J. (1992). Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation usability walkthroughs. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 373–380). New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J., & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (pp. 249–256). New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nørgaard, M., & Hornbæk, K. (2006). What do usability evaluators do in practice? an explorative study of think-aloud testing. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 209–218).

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, A. (1953). Applied imagination. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, T. (1988). Experiments with two computer assisted creative problem-solving aids. Omega: The International Journal of Management Science, 17, 2, 197–200.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripple, R.E. (1989). Ordinary creativity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14, 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of usability testing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satzinger, J., Garfield, M., & Nagasundaram, M. (1999). The creative process: the effects of group memory on individual idea generation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 15, 4, 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B., Fischer, G., Czerwinski, M., Resnick, M., Myers, B., Candy, L., Edmonds, E., Eisenberg, M., Giaccardi, E., Hewett, T., Jennings, P., Kules, B., Nakakoji, K., Nunamaker, J., Pausch, R., Selker, T., Sylvan, E., & Terry, M. (2006). Creativity support tools: report from a U.S. national science foundation sponsered workshop. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 20, 2, 61–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B. (2000). Creating creativity: user interfaces for supporting innovation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 1, 114–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sklar, A., & Gilmore, D. (2004) Are you positive? Interactions, may+june 2004, 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D.K., Paradice, D.B., & Smith, S.M. (2000). Prepare your mind for creativity. Communications of the ACM, 43, 7, 110–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G.F. (1998). Idea-generation techniques: a formulary of active ingredient. Journal of Creative Behaviour, 32, 2, 107–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of personality and social psychology, 49, 607–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D., Jarrett, C., Woddroffe, M., & Minocha, S. (2005). User interface design and evaluation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terry, M., & Mynatt, E. (2002). Recognizing creative needs in user interface design. In Proceedings of conference on creativity & cognition (pp. 38–44). New York, NY: ACM Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Tohidi, M., Buxton, W., Baecker, R., & Sellen, A. (2006). Getting the right design and the design right. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (pp. 1243–1252). New York, NY: ACM Press

    Google Scholar 

  • von Oech, R. (1992). A whack on the side of the head. Menlo Park, CA: Creative Think.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wixon, D. (2003). Evaluating usability methods: why the current literature fails the practitioner. Interactions, 10, 4, 29–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Basili, V., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Perspective-based usability inspection: an empirical validation of efficacy. Empirical Software Engineering, 4, 1, 43–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

    Kasper Hornbæk

Authors
  1. Kasper Hornbæk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut TIK, ETH ZĂĽrich, Switzerland

    Effie Lai-Chong Law

  2. Computer Science Department, University of Iceland, Iceland

    Ebba Thora Hvannberg PhD

  3. University of Sunderland, UK

    Gilbert Cockton MA, PGCE,PhD, CITP, FBCS, FRSA

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hornbæk, K. (2008). Usability Evaluation as Idea Generation. In: Law, E.LC., Hvannberg, E.T., Cockton, G. (eds) Maturing Usability. Human-Computer Interaction Series. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-941-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-941-5_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-940-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-941-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation