Making Useful and Useable Geovisualization

Fuhrmann, Sven; Ahonen-Rainio, Paula; Edsall, Robert M.; Fabrikant, Sara Irina; Koua, Etien L.; Tobón, Carolina; Ware, Colin; Wilson, Stephanie

doi:10.1016/b978-008044531-1/50446-2

Cited by 41 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In formative evaluation, both the usability (i.e., how easy it is to use) and the utility (i.e., how useful is it) are evaluated (Grinstein et al 2003). Formative evaluation is administered multiple times throughout the development process, improving the prototype iteratively (Krug 2000, Fuhrmann et al 2005. As Robinson et al (2005, 253) remark, "The evaluative effort must mirror the development effort, in that it should be constant throughout the progress of the project."…”

Section: A Primer On Usability Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More broadly, evaluation is not only a way to determine the success of a single application, but it is also a necessary step in the application of theory, producing the three-part validation system of theory, applications, and evaluation for interactive and web-based cartography (Figure 2). User-centered design and evaluation specific to usability testing borrow heavily from the disciplines of human-computer interaction (HCI) and web design, although there is a quickly growing body of research on usability within GIScience, particularly for geovisualization applications (see Slocum et al 2003, Fuhrmann et al 2005, Harrower and Sheesley 2005, and Robinson et al 2005, for example).…”

Section: A Primer On Usability Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VPA, also called talk aloud or simply protocol analysis, is a method for determining knowledge bases and problem solving strategies of users by asking them to speak aloud as they complete pre-determined tasks with the interface and is a common method for usability evaluation (Ericsson and Simon 1993, McGuinness 1994, Howard and MacEachren 1996, Haug et al 2001, Saraiya et al 2004, Fuhrmann et al 2005, Robinson et al 2005. VPA is triumphed as a method for moving beyond the recording of interaction outcomes, as with interaction logging, and instead generates data that describes the cognitive process itself (Ericsson and Simon 1993).…”

Section: Verbal Protocol Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Addressing Map Interface Usability: Learning from the Lakeshore Nature Preserve Interactive Map

Roth¹,

Harrower²

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

These are exciting days for cartography, as emerging technologies have greatly expanded the possibilities of online, interactive maps. These developments, however, now require cartographers to think about issues that only a few years ago fell solely in the domains of human-computer interaction (HCI) and web design. Further, given how fast these changes have occurred, there are few tried-and-true guidelines for building digital maps. This paper reports on the design, development, and evaluation of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Lakeshore Nature Preserve Interactive Map (www.lakeshorepreserve.wisc.edu) and outlines many of the insights gleaned from this process. The purpose of this article is to strengthen the important bridge between cartography and usability evaluation (i.e., how we study the way in which users interact with their maps and how we measure the success of those interactions) so that the efforts of a team of developers and stakeholders can be coordinated in a way that ensures the map works equally well for all potential end users. We outline the relative merits of two broad categories of evaluation techniques, arguing that there is no single, correct evaluation technique appropriate for all evaluation scenarios, and then detail the specific strategy adopted for evaluation of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve Interactive Map. We conclude by offering four design guidelines for online, interactive maps revealed during the evaluation of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve Interactive Map: two positive strategies we recommend for consideration when designing map interfaces (inclusion of cascading interface complexity and provision of map browsing flexibility) and two pitfalls we caution to avoid (minimalist design of interface widgets and employment of a lorem ipsum map during development).

show abstract

Section: A Primer On Usability Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Primer On Usability Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Verbal Protocol Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Addressing Map Interface Usability: Learning from the Lakeshore Nature Preserve Interactive Map

Roth¹,

Harrower²

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…HCI has a strong emphasis on User-Centered Design, a design approach that views knowledge about users and their involvement in the design as a central concern, and includes users in testing and evaluations in an interactive design process. In new designs of interfaces for geovisualization, this link between usability testing and user-centered design is becoming more prominent [5][6][7]. Choosing a usability evaluation method requires consideration of methodology issues and the objectives of the evaluation.…”

Section: Usability Evaluation Methodology For Geovisualizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The need to assess the usefulness and usability of geovisualization tools is increasing as new types of interactions emerge [9]. This interest has recently linked the HCI field, cognitive science and information science in a number of studies [4][5][6][7]. There is however a lack of evaluation methodologies and particularly task specifications for user based testing in exploratory geovisualization tool [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%