usability evaluation of the runkeeper application

Heuristic Evaluation Object Oriented Analysis & Design David O’ Connor T00130990

Heuristic Evaluation of an App

CA2 – Usability Evaluation

Assignment

Object Oriented Analysis & Design: Catherine Woods

Submitted By: David O’ Connor (KCOMP_G_Y6)

Submitted on: 25th March 2015

of 9


Table of Contents

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................3

2. Heuristic Process Options.................................................................................................................3

2.1. The Heuristic process....................................................................................................................3

2.1.1. Number of Evaluators...............................................................................................................4

2.1.2. Identify and define the goals of the mobile application...........................................................4

2.1.3. Define a set of tasks to be performed on the mobile application............................................4

2.1.4. Execute the task to evaluate the mobile application................................................................4

2.2. Rubric Design.................................................................................................................................5

2.3. Evaluation Test..............................................................................................................................6

2.3.1. Evaluation Results.....................................................................................................................6

2.3.2. Analysis.......................................................................................................................................7

3. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................................7

4. Appendix............................................................................................................................................8

5. References:.......................................................................................................................................10

of 9


1. IntroductionThe requirement of this assignment is to research, identify and document what are the most relevant and most important heuristics in the evaluation of a website/app. For this assignment I have chosen the RunKeeper app for this evaluation. This application is for the process of tracking distance ran for runners.

2. Heuristic Process Options

There are a number of different heuristics that can be used for the evaluation of websites and apps. For this project I considered all aspects of a number of these heuristics and selected what I felt was the best heuristic. The most popular used heuristic to evaluate the usability of websites are Nielsen’s Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design, which was chosen to evaluate the RunKeeper app.

Other heuristics which were considered for this project were

Bastien and Scapin created a set of 18 Ergonomic criteria, Gerhardt-Powals 10 Cognitive Engineering Principles

2.1. The Heuristic process

The steps involved in the Heuristic process for the evaluation of the app as stated by UX Centered Blog. (2009) are shown in the diagram below:

of 9


2.1.1. Number of Evaluators According to Jakob Nielsen’s study it is recommended that between three and five evaluators can generally point out between 80% - 90% of usability problems.

2.1.2. Identify and define the goals of the mobile application Track the user’s runs and walks Track the user’s cycling activities Track the user’s other outdoor fitness activities

2.1.3. Define a set of tasks to be performed on the mobile application Track the user’s distance/progress while running, walking, cycling or while undertaking

any other fitness activity.

2.1.4. Execute the task to evaluate the mobile applicationBelow is a list of Nielsen’s ten high level heuristics for the evaluation of the mobile application

1. Home Page Usability2. Task Orientation3. Navigation & IA4. Forms & Data Entry5. Page Layout & Visual Design6. Writing & Content Quality7. Trust & Credibility

of 9


2.2. Rubric DesignHome Page Usability Possible ScoreHomepage items are clearly focused key tasks 4 3Key aspects of the app are presented on the homepage 4 3There is a shortlist of other activities featured on the homepage, or within one click of the homepage

4 2

Total 12 8Task Orientation Possible ScoreRegistration for user’s is easy 4 4User’s most frequent activity is visible on the home page 4 4Users can start an activity quickly 4 4Total 12 12Navigation & IA Possible ScoreSwitching between activities is convenient and obvious 4 1Navigation task choices are ordered in the best possible logical or task oriented manner

4 3

Links and navigation between pages contain trigger words 4 4Total 12 8Forms & Data Entry Possible ScoreThere is a clear distinction of the required fields for registration 4 3The app makes it easy to correct user errors 4 4All data is validated before user is registered 4 4Total 12 11Page Layout & Visual Design Possible ScoreOn all pages all the most useful information (such as the users most frequently used features and functions) is presented on the first screenful of information.

4 4

Each page on the app shares a consistent layout 4 4The app has a consistent look and feel that will engage users. 4 4Total 12 12Writing & Content Quality Possible ScoreThe app has compelling and unique content 4 3The apps content for has been specifically created for its use 4 4Each page of the app is clearly labeled with a useful title that makes sense for the use of the bookmark

4 4

Total 12 11Trust & Credibility Possible ScoreThe apps content is all up-to-date and trustworthy 4 3The app is accurate in terms of distance travelled 4 2Each page has the same layout so that the user knows they are on the same app

4 4

Total 12 9

of 9


2.3. Evaluation TestThe evaluation of the runkeeper app was done using the criteria shown in the table below:

PointsHeuristic 1 2 3 4Home Page Usability

The features are very difficult to use

Some of the features are difficult to use

Most of the features are easy to use

The usability is very easy

Task Orientation The app shows poor orientation

The app shows ok orientation

The app shows good orientation

The app shows excellent orientation

Navigation & IA Navigation through the app is poor

Navigation through the app is bad

Navigation through the app is somewhat good

Navigation through the app is simple

Forms & Data Entry

Data entry is complicated

Data entry is hard

Data entry is easy

Data entry is simple

Page Layout & Visual Design

Layout & Design is poor

Layout & Design is somewhat good

Layout & Design is good

Layout & Design is great

Writing & Content Quality

Quality is poor Quality is ok Quality is good Quality is great

Trust & Credibility

Not trustworthy Somewhat trustworthy

Trustworthy Very trustworthy

2.3.1. Evaluation Results

2.3.2. Analysis

3. Conclusion

After evaluating the usability of this app I

have found that it can take time to figure out some of the features and the accuracy of the app in terms of distance travelled isn’t accurate as it should be. This app has a few downfalls but it also has a number of good features such as goal setting for training purposes and it also informs the user of miles/kms travelled in their activity.

of 9

Heuristic Questions ScoreActual Score Result

Home Page Usability 3 12 8 66.7Task Orientation 3 12 12 100.0Navigation & IA 3 12 8 66.7Forms & Data Entry 3 12 11 91.7Page Layout & Visual Design 3 12 12 100.0Writing & Content Quality 3 12 11 91.7Trust & Credibility 3 12 9 75.0Overall 21 84 71 84.5


4. Appendix Home Page Usability Possible ScoreHomepage items are clearly focused key tasks 4Key aspects of the app are presented on the homepage 4There is a shortlist of other activities featured on the homepage, or within one click of the homepage

4

Total 12Task Orientation Possible ScoreRegistration for user’s is easy 4User’s most frequent activity is visible on the home page 4Users can start an activity quickly 4Total 12Navigation & IA Possible ScoreSwitching between activities is convenient and obvious 4Navigation task choices are ordered in the best possible logical or task oriented manner

4

Links and navigation between pages contain trigger words 4Total 12Forms & Data Entry Possible ScoreThere is a clear distinction of the required fields for registration 4The app makes it easy to correct user errors 4All data is validated before user is registered 4Total 12Page Layout & Visual Design Possible ScoreOn all pages all the most useful information (such as the users most frequently used features and functions) is presented on the first screenful of information.

4

Each page on the app shares a consistent layout 4The app has a consistent look and feel that will engage users. 4Total 12Writing & Content Quality Possible ScoreThe app has compelling and unique content 4The apps content for has been specifically created for its use 4Each page of the app is clearly labeled with a useful title that makes sense for the use of the bookmark

4

Total 12Trust & Credibility Possible ScoreThe apps content is all up-to-date and trustworthy 4The app is accurate in terms of distance travelled 4Each page has the same layout so that the user knows they are on the same app

4

Total 12

of 9


Mobile Application interfaces

of 9


5. References:UX Centered Blog. (2009). Usability Guidelines for Heuristic Evaluation. Available: https://uxcentered.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/hello-world/. Last accessed 20th March 2015.

of 9

usability evaluation of the runkeeper application

Software