July 29 - PhD thesis of Countney V Martin, N Delia Grenville and Young Seok Lee

Coutney V Martin did her PhD dissertation on “Usability of Pictorial Toy Assembly Instructions for Young Children.”

Martin had one overarching question and 4 objectives. She used mixed-method approach, quantitative and qualitative. Tables, schematic diagrams, data tables, bar charts, photos, line graphs, and flowcharts were used

Usability assessment was for the Objectives 1-3. There were 4 hypothesis for Objective 1, none for Objective 2, and 3 hypothesis for Objective 3.

Rating used was Fun / No; Easy / Hard; Not Frustrating / Frustrating.
ANOVA was used for quantitative analysis.

For study of key usability factors, PCA (principal component analysis) method was employed to do the factor analysis. Variables used were:
1. Percentage of Incorrect Parts
2. Correct Parts Assembled Per Minute
3. Look Frequency
4. Look Duration
5. Look Time per Correct Part
6. Ranking Ease
7. Rating Ease
8. Ranking Fun
9. Rating Fun
10. Ranking Instructions
11. Again-Again
12. Verbal Protocol - Utterances of Hard per Minute of Assembly Time
13. Verbal Protocol - Problems Verbalized per Minute of Assembly Time
14. Extent of Building Experience
15. Previous Building Frequency.


N. Delia Grenville did his PhD dissertation on “DEVELOPING HEURISTICS TO OPTIMIZE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE VIDEO-MEDIATED ENVIRONMENT.”

RQ1, RH1a, RH1b, RQ2, RH2a, RH2b, RQ3, RH3, RQ4, RH4.
OR (Operation Research) Model, tables (to summarise info/literature review), schematic diagrams, data tables, bar charts, high-low bar charts,
His research had involved Human Factors, Facilities Planning/Design and Operation Research. My guess is that he did Industrial Engineering at Bachelor degree level.

7-point likert scale was used for the questionnaire survey. Compared data for naïve and experienced users. Used pairwise comparison. Mean and Standard Deviation.

This thesis is one which I should benchmark in the aspect of statistical methods because data collection was from questionnaire survey (with Likert scale) and 2 sets of evaluators were used (naïve and experience). This is what I plan to do….questionnaire survey using 2 groups of evaluators.

“A set of design heuristics was created from the design themes articulated by the
participants. These ten heuristics are focused on the design process repeatedly mentioned
by naïve and expert users. An eleventh heuristic was added as an instructional guideline.”
The design guidelines/heuristics used are not aligned to Nielsen’s or anybody’s.

He summarized the key differences between the naïve users and experienced users.
Expert evaluation was also used; 6 experts.
He had a revised OR Model.

In conclusion, he had done 2 studies. First study involved 25 naïve users and 25 experienced users. Second study involved experts. A set of eleven heuristics was developed.

Young Seok Lee did his PhD dissertation on “OLDER ADULTS’ USER EXPERIENCES WITH MOBILE PHONES: IDENTIFICATION OF USER CLUSTERS AND USER REQUIREMENTS.”

“Three user clusters (explorers, basicians, and minimalists) were identified based on mobile phone usage behavior, and their characteristics were described. User satisfaction was effected by three attributes of mobile phones: usefulness, ease of use, and pleasure of use.”
“Barriers (perceptual, cognitive, attitudinal, knowledge, and information barriers) were found to hinder older adults’ utilization of mobile phone technology over the four dimensions of the domestication process (appropriation, objectification, incorporation, and conversion).”

Mixed method research; Study 1 was quantitative - Self-report questionnaire; Study 2 was qualitative - Phenomenology interview.

Tables to summarise literature review.

For Study 1, 5-point likert scale was used for questionnaire survey. ANOVA and t-test were used. 3 Reseach Questions were: “1. How do older adults use the mobile phones? Age and gender differences? 2. How many user groups can be formed? Their characteristics? 3. How will usefulness, ease of use, pleasure of use will affect user satisfaction with mobile phones? Age, gender, cluster differences?” Data analysis were: “1. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis 2.Cluster analysis and validation 3. Factor analysis and multiple regression analysis.” Bar charts showing mean and standard deviation; line graphs; factor analysis; multiple regression analysis.

For Study 2, he used 4 participants from each of the 3 user clusters. Qualitative study.

What can I learn from this? Probably, I could benchmark on how he did his data analysis. It is noted that his Study 1 would be quite different from mine because he seemed to be exploratory for Study 1. Despite the Exploratory approach, he had used descriptive statistics.