2019
DOI: 10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-2-w17-143-2019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

3dmover 2.0 – Low-Cost Application for Usability Testing of 3d Geovisualisations

Abstract: Abstract. Three-dimensional (3D) visualisations of geospatial data have become very popular in the last years. Various applications and tools are based on interactive 3D geovisualisations. However, the user aspects of these 3D geovisualisations are not yet fully understood. While several studies have focused on how users work with these 3D geovisualisations, only few studies focus directly on interactive 3D geovisualisations and employ usability research methods like screen logging. This method enables the obj… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 27 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previously, this tool has been successfully used in several user studies conducted in controlled conditions (Herman and Stachoň, 2016;Hájek et al, 2018;Herman et al, 2018a;Herman et al, 2018b;. Modifications that guaranteed satisfactory operation even for the purposes of asynchronous testing were made during the development of version 2.0 (Herman, 2019), the first attempt at asynchronous remote testing was also made using this version of the tool (Juřík et al, 2018).…”
Section: Testing Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previously, this tool has been successfully used in several user studies conducted in controlled conditions (Herman and Stachoň, 2016;Hájek et al, 2018;Herman et al, 2018a;Herman et al, 2018b;. Modifications that guaranteed satisfactory operation even for the purposes of asynchronous testing were made during the development of version 2.0 (Herman, 2019), the first attempt at asynchronous remote testing was also made using this version of the tool (Juřík et al, 2018).…”
Section: Testing Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%