Evaluating usability
Mie Nørgaard, Rune Thaarup Høegh · 2008
Usability evaluation is widely accepted as a valuable activity in software development. However, how results effectively are fed back to developers is still a relatively unexplored area. We argue that usability feedback can be understood as an argument for a series of usability problems, and that basic concepts from argumentation theory can help us understand how to create persuasive feedback. We revisit two field studies on usability feedback to study if concepts from Toulmin's model for argumentation and Aristotle's modes of persuasion can explain why some feedback formats outperform others. We recommend that evaluators specifically back up the warrants behind their usability claims, that their arguments use several modes of persuasion, and that they present feedback in browsable amounts not to overwhelm developers with information. For complex and controversial problems, we advise evaluators to involve developers in a learning process and provide the opportunity to experience and discuss the findings.