This document discusses different methods for evaluating prototypes, including heuristics, cognitive walkthroughs, co-discovery, wizard of oz testing, and scales. It describes cognitive walkthroughs as having team members walk through user stories together and ask questions about controls and feedback. Co-discovery involves observing selected users attempt to complete tasks with a prototype. Wizard of oz testing systematically observes how real users complete tasks for a prototype's intended purpose. Scales like the System Usability Scale and AttrakDiff can also be used to evaluate prototypes.

1. evaluating
prototypes

2. why should we do it?

3. http://userexperienceproject.blogspot.com.ee/2007/04/user-experience-wheel.html

4. well… there’s so much,
but we will focus
on uselfulness, usability
and accessibility

5. https://www.ted.com/playlists/80/design_of_useful_things

6. http://www.ovationtv.com/these-items-are-now-useless-and-totally-awesome/

8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_mapping_(interface_design)

10. form a
goal
Intent to
act
plan to
act
execute
feedback
interpret
feedback
evaluate
feedback

11. form a
goal
Intent to
act
plan to
act
execute
feedback
interpret
feedback
evaluate
feedback

12. form a
goal
Intent to
act
plan to
act
execute
feedback
interpret
feedback
evaluate
feedback

13. http://petekinser.com/norman-action-cycle/

15. http://uxpajournal.org/determining-what-
individual-sus-scores-mean-adding-an-adjective-
http://designforall.org/design.php

16. http://designforall.org/design.php

17. so, how do we go
about evaluating the usefulness,
usability and accessibility of our
prototypes?

18. from the book “The Usability Engineering Life Cycle” by J. Nielsen

20. heuristics
cognitive walkthrough
co-discovery
wizard of Oz
scales

21. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/

22. https://idmu.org/2012/10/07/seven-principles-of-universal-design/

23. heuristics
cognitive walkthrough
co-discovery
wizard of Oz
scales

24. the purpose is to verify if the prototype
allows the fulfillment of the selected user stories while
critically reflecting upon them
this is a within team activity

25. team members walk through all user stories and related
activities as a group, asking themselves the following set of
questions at each step
Will intended users realistically be trying to do this action?
Is the control for the action visible?
Is there a strong link between the control and the action?
Is feedback appropriate?

27. heuristics
cognitive walkthrough
co-discovery
wizard of Oz
scales

28. designers prompt selected user stories and two potential users
attempt to address them together while being observed
participants are encouraged to explain what they
are thinking about while addressing each challenge
designers refrain from explaining design decisions and focus on getting the
most of the pair of users tackling with the prototype, observing, identifying
challenges and opportunities, and taking notes

30. heuristics
cognitive walkthrough
co-discovery
wizard of Oz
scales

31. this king of evaluation involves systematic observation
under controlled conditions to determine
how well people can use a product
rather than showing users a rough draft and asking, “Do you understand
this?”, this kind of testing involves watching people trying to use something
for its intended purpose

33. setting up such a test involves asking participants to recreate a
set of user stories after being introduced to the underlying
scenario
for example, to test the attachment function of an e-mail program, a
scenario would describe a situation where a person needs to send an e-
mail attachment, and ask her or him to undertake this task
the goal is to observe how people function in a realistic way, so that
designers can see spot challenges and opportunities

34. heuristics
cognitive walkthrough
co-discovery
wizard of Oz
scales

35. System Usability Scale

36. http://uxpajournal.org/determining-what-individual-sus-scores-mean-adding-an-adjective-rating-scale/
/
/

37. AttrakDiff

40. http://okcancel.com/comic/64.html

41. evaluating early
prototypes

42. David Lamas
david.lamas@acm.org