Evaluating Presentation Factors - Research Paper Example

Evaluating Presentation Factors Number Evaluating Presentation Factors A Graphical User Interface (GUI) essentially conveys complex underlying computing instructions and processes to the user in a simplified and understandable manner. This primary goal of GUI design can be achieved through effective presentation of the interface design. Sikorski (2012), argues that this can be achieved by use of symbols, typography, color, static and dynamic graphics to present concepts, facts and emotions in a user friendly way. Consequently, my design of the graphical user interface inco-operated the use of several presentation factors in the user interface described below (Galer, Harker, Ziegler, & Galer, 2013); Layout; the layout of the user interface design is organized using Forms arranged in proportionate grids. Each form has their function including collecting clients information, displaying product catalogue among others. Color and texture; the forms are well laid out and designed in appropriate color that will enhance clarity and vision. The chosen color, texture and light effectively convey complex information in pictorial reality. Imagery; images are used to display the product catalogues in a way that transforms the way a customer chooses the products they need. Animation; this is used mainly in the initialization interfaces as an introduction of the system to the users (employees and customers). Others include Typography and sound. These presentation factors are also identified by Botella, Alarcon & Penalver, which according to them, provides a successful interface that can easily attain its objective ( Botella, Alarcon & Penalver, 2013). According to Heim (2008), it is important to carefully consider presentation factors before adopting them in the design of user interface. Criteria for choosing presentation factors in a user interface design. Several considerations must be used in determining the most effective presentation factors in a user interface design. The following criteria were used in determining the best presentation factors to use in the design of the user interface (Botella, Alarcon & Penalver, 2013): Heuristic evaluation criteria This criterion is proposed by Bouvier, Chen, Lewandowski, McCartney, Sanders, & VanDeGrift. According to their proposal usability attributes determines the effectiveness of the adopted presentation factors in serving the users of the interface. The considerations in these criteria include (Bouvier et al, 2012); i) Learnability Learnability is the ability of a user to learn, understand and effectively use an interface. The presentation factors used in the design will be determined by learnability. For instance, how long will it take a user to learn understand and be productive in the system? It is important to use the basic presentation factors, organize them properly in a manner that enhances interaction and conveys the intended communication. In my design, this was achieved by using the common presentation factors such as Icons, images and forms among others. These presentation factors are easy to understand and learn from the user’s perspective (Bouvier et al, 2012). ii) Speed of Operation Presentation factors determine the speed of operation; some presentation factors are too cumbersome and hence slow the speed of operation while others are fast hence enhancing the speed of operation (Bouvier et al, 2012). Consequently, this must be considered in choosing the presentation factors in the interface. A good example in our design is the limitation of the use of text that requires the user to read hence reducing operation speed. The best approach was to use images and icons particularly on presenting the product catalogue. iii) Robustness In most cases the users are prone to error making; therefore, the robustness of the presentation factors must be considered. The question the designer must ask is how tolerant is the system to errors made by the users? The interface must communicate to the user should there be any mistake in their operation. In my design this is achieved by using message boxes that can communicate to the user whenever they make mistakes (Bouvier et al, 2012). iv) Clarity Users of software will enjoy using a system that is clear and an interface that has no ambiguities. Clarity is achieved by use of appropriate presentation factors that minimize ambiguity. Ambiguity mainly arises with the use of icons; the designer must use the appropriate icons for the intended purpose. Example of clarity considerations Cognitive walkthrough evaluation The evaluation criteria are proposed by Botella et al. In this evaluation criterion, user interface design presentation factors are evaluated on how well it supports the users in learning and performing the tasks inherent in the system. The evaluation is normally performed by experts who are well versed in cognitive psychology. They mainly identify the problems that are associated with the presentation factors using the psychological principles (Botella et al, 2013). In the cognitive walkthrough evaluation criteria, each evaluation considers the impact that an interaction will have on the user, the cognitive processes that are required and the potential learning problems that may occur while using the user interface (Botella et al, 2013). One of the most important considerations in choosing the presentation factors is whether their use in the user interface will lead the user to generate the correct goals for the interface? Measuring the effectiveness of the chosen presentation factors. The effectiveness of the presentation factors that are used for the design can be measured using various evaluations. However, the best strategy of considering this measurements is using the five E’s; Efficient, Effective, Engaging, Error tolerant and Easy to learn (Galer, Harker, Ziegler, & Galer, 2013). i) Efficiency: In determining the efficiency of a user interface design, time is used as an evaluation tool. Here the time taken by the user to perform a particular task is used to evaluate the effectiveness of the presentation factors chosen. These can be achieved by determining how fat clients or customers were able to do registration, browse the product catalogue and make purchases. This can be done by using test data before actual implementation of the software (Galer et al, 2013). ii) Effectiveness: Effectiveness of the presentation factors used in the design is determined by evaluating the various tasks in the interface and how they are successfully and accurately completed. It also involves determining how often errors are produced by the users of the interface. In my interface design, these will be evaluated by how registration, inventory management and product purchases are completed by the different users (Galer et al, 2013). iii) Engaging: User satisfaction surveys, questionnaires and interviews can be used to determine the acceptance and usability of the interface. By default, this is a determination of the acceptability of the chosen presentation factors (Galer et al, 2013). iv) Error tolerant: Users make errors all the time while using the interface. The chosen presentation factors must be able to tolerate errors made by users. This is determined by how warnings are conveyed and how the errors are identified and corrected. The interface designed for the software has the ability to warn users if they make errors by using sound warnings and message boxes (Galer et al, 2013). v) Ease of Learning: The chosen presentation factors must be easy to learn and understood by the intended users. This can be determined by recruiting test users with different knowledge and skills and determine how they can use the interface (Galer et al, 2013). References. Botella, F., Alarcon, E., & Peñalver, A. (2013, November). A new proposal for improving heuristic evaluation reports performed by novice evaluators. In Proceedings of the 2013 Chilean Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 72-75). ACM. Bouvier, D., Chen, T. Y., Lewandowski, G., McCartney, R., Sanders, K., & VanDeGrift, T. (2012, July). User interface evaluation by novices. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 327-332). ACM. Galer, M., Harker, S., Ziegler, J., & Galer, M. (Eds.). (2013). Methods and tools in user-centred design for information technology. Elsevier. Heim, S. (2008).  The resonant interface: HCI foundations for interaction design.  Boston: Pearson. Sikorski, M. (2012). User-System Interaction Design in IT Projects. Wydawnictwo Politechnika Gdańska. Gdańsk. Read More