When reviewing an interface without the benefit of usabilties testing results, is there a standard way to do heuristic evalutions of an interface?
|
The guidelines posted below from Aaron Mciver about Jacob et al are loose guidelines and change depending on what you are reviewing; websites use slightly different heuristics including homepage/search etc, which are pretty specific. What really helps me is having a rigid framework to check if my heuristics pass/fail/don't know. I'll also include comments beside each one. eg
Once you've gone through your spreadsheet you should go back to the points you've commented and grab screens (if you haven't done so already) of the offending sections. This will give you a bunch of comments plus screens with which you can put your report together with. |
|||||||||||||
|
|
The top ten from Jakob Nielsen should be your starting point.
|
||||
|
|
|
On top of Nielsen's top 10, there's also Ben Shneiderman's Eight Golden Rules from 'Designing the User Interface': 1 Strive for consistency. Consistent sequences of actions should be required in similar situations; identical terminology should be used in prompts, menus, and help screens; and consistent commands should be employed throughout. 2 Enable frequent users to use shortcuts. As the frequency of use increases, so do the user's desires to reduce the number of interactions and to increase the pace of interaction. Abbreviations, function keys, hidden commands, and macro facilities are very helpful to an expert user. 3 Offer informative feedback. For every operator action, there should be some system feedback. For frequent and minor actions, the response can be modest, while for infrequent and major actions, the response should be more substantial. 4 Design dialog to yield closure. Sequences of actions should be organized into groups with a beginning, middle, and end. The informative feedback at the completion of a group of actions gives the operators the satisfaction of accomplishment, a sense of relief, the signal to drop contingency plans and options from their minds, and an indication that the way is clear to prepare for the next group of actions. 5 Offer simple error handling. As much as possible, design the system so the user cannot make a serious error. If an error is made, the system should be able to detect the error and offer simple, comprehensible mechanisms for handling the error. 6 Permit easy reversal of actions. This feature relieves anxiety, since the user knows that errors can be undone; it thus encourages exploration of unfamiliar options. The units of reversibility may be a single action, a data entry, or a complete group of actions. 7 Support internal locus of control. Experienced operators strongly desire the sense that they are in charge of the system and that the system responds to their actions. Design the system to make users the initiators of actions rather than the responders. 8 Reduce short-term memory load. The limitation of human information processing in short-term memory requires that displays be kept simple, multiple page displays be consolidated, window-motion frequency be reduced, and sufficient training time be allotted for codes, mnemonics, and sequences of actions. |
|||||||||
|
|
A checklist from the book "GUI Bloopers (2)" by Jeff Johnson: |
|||
|
This is quite a useful checklist from Bruce Tognazzini During his 14 years at Apple Computer, he founded the Apple Human Interface Group and acted as Apple's Human Interface Evangelist... Here's the link: |
|||
|
|