Studio 12, 13 & 14: Running a Quantitative Study

The novice user will be a person from another group within the class.

Before we picked another user, I recorded down Sharaz’s results. These are displayed below:

Task 1) Time taken: 36.9 seconds, Number of errors: 0.
Task 2) Time taken: 19.0 seconds, Number of errors: 0.

The new users results will be evaluated against the experienced users results. The user’s results (from a different group) are displayed below.

Task 1) Time taken: 1 minute 07.2 seconds, Number of errors: 3.
Task 2) Time taken: 31.5.0 seconds, Number of errors: 1.

User comments:

• ‘Ah! this is the video, where do you go to use the camera instead’.
• ‘Phone is alright to use especially for a first timer.’
• ‘The contacts task was simple enough but it was easily forgotten how to and where to input information such as email and address.’

Based on this I feel that this certain mobile phone is actually usable. This is because the camera task was done quite quickly for a first user although one error was made (going onto the video camera instead of the digital camera). This was done by accident and the user had actually resolved the problem straight away. This must mean the camera icon was clearly visible to the user, thus they could select it quickly without thinking for too long. The adding contacts task took a bit longer than expected but in the end it was completed. It could be argued that there were 3 errors made during this task making it unusable. This is true but this would be a one off mistake. If I was to ask the user to do the same thing again they should do it with no errors and in minimal time. In fact this should mobile phone could be further tested next time including the recognition and memory attribute.