SlideShare a Scribd company logo

ECE695DVisualAnalyticsprojectproposal (2)

•Download as DOCX, PDF•
•
Shweta Gupte
Shweta Gupte

This document proposes evaluating the usability of VALET, a visual analytics software developed by Purdue University's VACCINE lab for law enforcement officials. The project aims to collect user data through surveys, interviews, and recording user actions during goal-directed tasks. This will provide insights into difficulties with the current interface to propose design improvements around information scent, cognitive task analysis, and GOMS modeling. Future work would compare a new interface design to the current one through additional user studies and expert reviews.

1 of 4
VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 1 VALET PROJECT PROPOSAL Prepared for ECE695D • Sep 8, 2013 Project Proposal v.1 Project Proposal 1. Introduction 1.1. About the Technology 2. Project Vision 3. User Data 3.1. Experiment data collection 3.2 Design related propositions 4.Future 5.References AMPLPrepared for John Cooper • Aug 15, 2012 1. Introduction 1.1. About the Technology For the ECE 695D course project, we wish to evaluate a Visual analytics technology called Visual Analytics, Law Enforcement toolkit (VALET) developed by the VACCINE lab. The main audience of the product is the law enforcement officials. We wish evaluate the User interface of the product and conduct Usability analyses of the product and propose design suggestions and recommendations, taking into consideration the human aspects like cognition, attention, and memory. This project is an undertaking of two students: Joseph Choi and Shweta Gupte. 2. Project Vision The main purpose of this project is to find out how much value this product would carry when it is put in practice. We will be evaluating it from the user side in hope of enhancing the user interface and thus improving the user experience. Below is the current design of the product:
VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 2 Figure 1:Current VALET User Interface The preliminary self-reported analysis revealed that the user interface is not very user-friendly. The product is merely a prototype so this would be an appropriate time to do Usability analyses of the system and propose some design improvements. Below is our break down of the project: Figure 2: Overview breakdown of the project In the above figure the linguistic survey means the toolbar and menu items the text used in the interface. This survey is done to figure out if the test used is known to the user and is a common knowledge to the user or not. The user data and the linguistic survey, along with the interface critique, will shape the propositions of design changes.
VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 3 3. User Data 3.1. Experiment data collection The VACCINE lab has approved IRB for testing the software with users who would be directly working with the product. The various ways we can do data collection is: ■ Surveys ■ Interviews ■ Record the user actions. ■ Goal directed experiment and recording times We plan to conduct experiment within subject. We can also design experiment such that half subjects will be given brief training and the other half will not. Another option is to test one group with current version, then, build a new design and test a new group with the new version. Then, we would give testing to the new group with the old version and previous group the new version. Subjects will be randomly assigned to each group. Making a new version will not be feasible for this semester. Our primary semester goal is to collect the user data for the old version only for one group. We will do a goal directed study and collect the time it took the user to complete given tasks, how easy it will be for users to evaluate their plan of action and organize the resources. We will record the user action and activity as well during this process. Simple interviews and surveys will yield more insight into how the users try to solve a problem and draw conclusion to achieve their goal (know their train of thought). We can also get feedback on the interface and their expectations. We can compare VALET to other existing systems the users have used before. 3.2 Design related propositions We are more interested in knowing how difficult or easy it is to use the current system. During the self- reported analysis it was found that there were many things that confused the users like the color combinations, too many options they need to pick before they can start analyzing, and etc. A few design proposals that we are interested in investigating further are: ■ Information scent-Providing Visual cues to the users to help them navigate the product (Chi et al,2000) ■ Cognitive task analysis (Crandall and Hoffman,2006) GOMS is one of the ways we can test the Human computer interaction.(Card, Thomas,and Newell,1983) 4. Future For future work, the new UI should be compared with the current UI by conducting User study to know whether the new design works better than the current one. An expert review would also be required. 5. References i. MAY, J., & Barnard,P. J. (2003).Cognitive Task Analysis in ICS. In D. Diaper & N. Stanton (Eds.), The Handbook ofTask Analysis in Human-Computer Interaction (pp.291 - 325) ii. Kieras, D., John, B., The GOMS Family of Analysis Techniques: Tools for Design and Evaluation, CMU-HCII-94-106, 1994 iii. Kieras, D., John, B., Using GOMS for User Interface Design and Evaluation: Which Technique?, June-1996
VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 4 iv. Kieras, D., John, B., The GOMS Family of User Interface Analysis Techniques: Comparison and Contrast v. Card, Stuart; Thomas P. Moran and Allen Newell (1983). The Psychology of Human Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. vi. Ed H. Chi, Peter Pirolli, James Pitkow. The Scent of a Site: A System for Analyzing and Predicting Information Scent, Usage, and Usability of a Web Site. In Proc. of ACM CHI 2000 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 161--168, 581, 582. vii. Crandall,B., Klein, G., and Hoffman, R. (2006). Working minds:A practitioner's guide to cognitive task analysis. MIT Press.

More Related Content

ECE695DVisualAnalyticsprojectproposal (2)

  • 1. VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 1 VALET PROJECT PROPOSAL Prepared for ECE695D • Sep 8, 2013 Project Proposal v.1 Project Proposal 1. Introduction 1.1. About the Technology 2. Project Vision 3. User Data 3.1. Experiment data collection 3.2 Design related propositions 4.Future 5.References AMPLPrepared for John Cooper • Aug 15, 2012 1. Introduction 1.1. About the Technology For the ECE 695D course project, we wish to evaluate a Visual analytics technology called Visual Analytics, Law Enforcement toolkit (VALET) developed by the VACCINE lab. The main audience of the product is the law enforcement officials. We wish evaluate the User interface of the product and conduct Usability analyses of the product and propose design suggestions and recommendations, taking into consideration the human aspects like cognition, attention, and memory. This project is an undertaking of two students: Joseph Choi and Shweta Gupte. 2. Project Vision The main purpose of this project is to find out how much value this product would carry when it is put in practice. We will be evaluating it from the user side in hope of enhancing the user interface and thus improving the user experience. Below is the current design of the product:
  • 2. VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 2 Figure 1:Current VALET User Interface The preliminary self-reported analysis revealed that the user interface is not very user-friendly. The product is merely a prototype so this would be an appropriate time to do Usability analyses of the system and propose some design improvements. Below is our break down of the project: Figure 2: Overview breakdown of the project In the above figure the linguistic survey means the toolbar and menu items the text used in the interface. This survey is done to figure out if the test used is known to the user and is a common knowledge to the user or not. The user data and the linguistic survey, along with the interface critique, will shape the propositions of design changes.
  • 3. VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 3 3. User Data 3.1. Experiment data collection The VACCINE lab has approved IRB for testing the software with users who would be directly working with the product. The various ways we can do data collection is: ■ Surveys ■ Interviews ■ Record the user actions. ■ Goal directed experiment and recording times We plan to conduct experiment within subject. We can also design experiment such that half subjects will be given brief training and the other half will not. Another option is to test one group with current version, then, build a new design and test a new group with the new version. Then, we would give testing to the new group with the old version and previous group the new version. Subjects will be randomly assigned to each group. Making a new version will not be feasible for this semester. Our primary semester goal is to collect the user data for the old version only for one group. We will do a goal directed study and collect the time it took the user to complete given tasks, how easy it will be for users to evaluate their plan of action and organize the resources. We will record the user action and activity as well during this process. Simple interviews and surveys will yield more insight into how the users try to solve a problem and draw conclusion to achieve their goal (know their train of thought). We can also get feedback on the interface and their expectations. We can compare VALET to other existing systems the users have used before. 3.2 Design related propositions We are more interested in knowing how difficult or easy it is to use the current system. During the self- reported analysis it was found that there were many things that confused the users like the color combinations, too many options they need to pick before they can start analyzing, and etc. A few design proposals that we are interested in investigating further are: ■ Information scent-Providing Visual cues to the users to help them navigate the product (Chi et al,2000) ■ Cognitive task analysis (Crandall and Hoffman,2006) GOMS is one of the ways we can test the Human computer interaction.(Card, Thomas,and Newell,1983) 4. Future For future work, the new UI should be compared with the current UI by conducting User study to know whether the new design works better than the current one. An expert review would also be required. 5. References i. MAY, J., & Barnard,P. J. (2003).Cognitive Task Analysis in ICS. In D. Diaper & N. Stanton (Eds.), The Handbook ofTask Analysis in Human-Computer Interaction (pp.291 - 325) ii. Kieras, D., John, B., The GOMS Family of Analysis Techniques: Tools for Design and Evaluation, CMU-HCII-94-106, 1994 iii. Kieras, D., John, B., Using GOMS for User Interface Design and Evaluation: Which Technique?, June-1996
  • 4. VALET • VACCINE LAB • Purdue University 4 iv. Kieras, D., John, B., The GOMS Family of User Interface Analysis Techniques: Comparison and Contrast v. Card, Stuart; Thomas P. Moran and Allen Newell (1983). The Psychology of Human Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. vi. Ed H. Chi, Peter Pirolli, James Pitkow. The Scent of a Site: A System for Analyzing and Predicting Information Scent, Usage, and Usability of a Web Site. In Proc. of ACM CHI 2000 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 161--168, 581, 582. vii. Crandall,B., Klein, G., and Hoffman, R. (2006). Working minds:A practitioner's guide to cognitive task analysis. MIT Press.