Which comes first, usability or utility?

G. Grinstein, A. Kobsa, C. Plaisant, J. Stasko
{"title":"Which comes first, usability or utility?","authors":"G. Grinstein, A. Kobsa, C. Plaisant, J. Stasko","doi":"10.1109/VISUAL.2003.1250426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Georges Grinstein Questions often asked when presenting some new model, new theory, new research or new visualization include: How useful or how usable is it? and Have you performed any tests? Visualization is an interface technology and as such includes not just software algorithms and techniques, but computer human interaction issues as well. This makes it draw from both areas, one appearing more focused on utility and the other on usability. One key step in the development of a new theory is the attempt to first solve a problem. That problem or question does not include a usability section; in some domain it may not even contain a utility one from most people's perspectives. We discuss both sides of the issue to clarify the role of each in the development of new visualization technologies. Position Statement Alfred Kobsa In the HCI literature one can find studies which conclude that ease of use is more important than usefulness (Hubona & Blanton 1996), that the opposite holds true (Liao and Landry 2000), and that ease of use is more important for females while the usefulness is more important for males (Yuen and Ma 2002). In this panel contribution, we will present several user studies with information visualization systems, ranging from lab experiments with closed questions to longitudinal adoption studies with administrative data analysts (Gonzales & Kobsa, 2003; Kobsa 2001, 2003; Mark et al. 2003). -------------------------------------------a e-mail: grinstein@cs.uml.edu e-mail: kobsa@uci.edu e-mail: plaisant@cs.umd.edu e-mail ben@cs.umd.edu e-mail statsko@cc.gatech.edu Consistent with general HCI research, the results show that both factors are important in certain situations, but do not indicate a clear superiority of one factor over the other. Position Statement Catherine Plaisant Is an airplane a better vehicle than a Jaguar, a mountain bicycle or a kid scooter? It all depends of where you need to go, what your goal for the travel is, how old you are, what terrain you will encounter on the way, how long you can spend learning, and many other parameters. All those vehicles are fairly usable but they all require training except for adults using the scooter, and their utility varies enormously as a function of the task and the user. The average car drivers benefit from years of human factor engineering and a large amount of standardization, allowing them to switch from a pickup truck to a convertible in a snap. Similarly, the success of a visualization tool depends on how well it fits the needs of the users it attempts to serve, and the tasks they want to accomplish. If utility may come first for an expert tool (e.g. for discovery tasks requires days of data examination and manipulation), usability has to come first in public access information systems that requires \"immediate usability\" (e.g. interactive displays of census statistics) otherwise users will walk away frustrated. Usability design principles imply that designers and evaluators understand the needs of users to decide which one of the two utility or usability comes first, and to set levels of required utility and usability. Utility and usability are both attainable goals that make each other stronger. Like others, we at the University of Maryland have been developing visualization techniques and have struggled over the years to find the best way to evaluate their benefits. Many evaluations have been controlled experiments and we have found that the most useful evaluations were multi-faceted, including qualitative and quantitative measurements or performance, preference and learnability, and I will be show examples from our research. Often we also find that the observations gathered during the experiment can be as informative as the collected measurements. More recently we have been promoting the development of benchmark datasets and tasks that will allow better comparisons between tools and techniques. We have been involved in the 1st InfoVis contest, which calls for the submission of case studies of pairwise comparison of trees. Three pairs of datasets were provided: philogenies, classifications and file system usage data, 605 Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS’03) 0-7695-2030-8/03 $ 17.00 © 2003 IEEE and open ended tasks described. Accepted submissions will seed an online repository that can be enhanced over time with additional datasets, tasks, case studies and controlled experiment results. I will report on the results of the contest and reflect on how evaluation repository and benchmark datasets might help us understand how to judge the usability and utility of our tools. The contest is at: http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/iv03contest/ Position Statement Ben Shneiderman The answer to the question of usability or utility first depends on your definition of usability. For me, usability is more than the color of widgets and placement of text. Usability is about understanding, stating, and serving user needs. Since these needs are the requirements that shape the tool, they determine the utility. The design of excellent tools depends upon understanding how they will be used; therefore usability is a pre-requisite for successful utility. Position Statement John T. Stasko If the question is, \"Which comes first, utility or usability?\" my answer is \"yes\". Both notions are vitally important in the development of information visualization techniques and systems, and they are just two sides of the same coin. When the field of information visualization formed and first grew, the computer graphics and visualization aspects dominated. More recently, an increasing emphasis on the HCI aspects of the field has emerged as we strive to better understand how people can truly benefit from our ideas. When an information visualization technique is implemented in a system, the usability component is crucial. Poor interface design can hamper adoption and cloud the utility benefits that may be possible. In information visualization, usability typically does not equate with the common notion of a system being easy to learn. Information visualization systems are complex and they often will be used extensively for long periods of time. Consequently, making a system efficient and natural to use, making functions and operations visible, and simply paying attention to the user interface are key components. This is especially true in systems where interaction and multiple views are essential. For any information visualization technique to be adopted beyond the initial idea generation, there must be some utility or value in that technique. Our field is not about making pretty pictures. It is about helping people with the complex tasks involved in data analysis and understanding. We need to do a better job of articulating the cognitive tasks that occur in data analysis (location, correlation, emphasis, association, etc.) and articulating how information visualization techniques and systems can help with these tasks. Ultimately, a kind of natural selection will occur: systems with utility and value will be adopted and used, while others will quietly fade away.","PeriodicalId":372131,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Visualization, 2003. VIS 2003.","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Visualization, 2003. VIS 2003.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/VISUAL.2003.1250426","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Georges Grinstein Questions often asked when presenting some new model, new theory, new research or new visualization include: How useful or how usable is it? and Have you performed any tests? Visualization is an interface technology and as such includes not just software algorithms and techniques, but computer human interaction issues as well. This makes it draw from both areas, one appearing more focused on utility and the other on usability. One key step in the development of a new theory is the attempt to first solve a problem. That problem or question does not include a usability section; in some domain it may not even contain a utility one from most people's perspectives. We discuss both sides of the issue to clarify the role of each in the development of new visualization technologies. Position Statement Alfred Kobsa In the HCI literature one can find studies which conclude that ease of use is more important than usefulness (Hubona & Blanton 1996), that the opposite holds true (Liao and Landry 2000), and that ease of use is more important for females while the usefulness is more important for males (Yuen and Ma 2002). In this panel contribution, we will present several user studies with information visualization systems, ranging from lab experiments with closed questions to longitudinal adoption studies with administrative data analysts (Gonzales & Kobsa, 2003; Kobsa 2001, 2003; Mark et al. 2003). -------------------------------------------a e-mail: grinstein@cs.uml.edu e-mail: kobsa@uci.edu e-mail: plaisant@cs.umd.edu e-mail ben@cs.umd.edu e-mail statsko@cc.gatech.edu Consistent with general HCI research, the results show that both factors are important in certain situations, but do not indicate a clear superiority of one factor over the other. Position Statement Catherine Plaisant Is an airplane a better vehicle than a Jaguar, a mountain bicycle or a kid scooter? It all depends of where you need to go, what your goal for the travel is, how old you are, what terrain you will encounter on the way, how long you can spend learning, and many other parameters. All those vehicles are fairly usable but they all require training except for adults using the scooter, and their utility varies enormously as a function of the task and the user. The average car drivers benefit from years of human factor engineering and a large amount of standardization, allowing them to switch from a pickup truck to a convertible in a snap. Similarly, the success of a visualization tool depends on how well it fits the needs of the users it attempts to serve, and the tasks they want to accomplish. If utility may come first for an expert tool (e.g. for discovery tasks requires days of data examination and manipulation), usability has to come first in public access information systems that requires "immediate usability" (e.g. interactive displays of census statistics) otherwise users will walk away frustrated. Usability design principles imply that designers and evaluators understand the needs of users to decide which one of the two utility or usability comes first, and to set levels of required utility and usability. Utility and usability are both attainable goals that make each other stronger. Like others, we at the University of Maryland have been developing visualization techniques and have struggled over the years to find the best way to evaluate their benefits. Many evaluations have been controlled experiments and we have found that the most useful evaluations were multi-faceted, including qualitative and quantitative measurements or performance, preference and learnability, and I will be show examples from our research. Often we also find that the observations gathered during the experiment can be as informative as the collected measurements. More recently we have been promoting the development of benchmark datasets and tasks that will allow better comparisons between tools and techniques. We have been involved in the 1st InfoVis contest, which calls for the submission of case studies of pairwise comparison of trees. Three pairs of datasets were provided: philogenies, classifications and file system usage data, 605 Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS’03) 0-7695-2030-8/03 $ 17.00 © 2003 IEEE and open ended tasks described. Accepted submissions will seed an online repository that can be enhanced over time with additional datasets, tasks, case studies and controlled experiment results. I will report on the results of the contest and reflect on how evaluation repository and benchmark datasets might help us understand how to judge the usability and utility of our tools. The contest is at: http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/iv03contest/ Position Statement Ben Shneiderman The answer to the question of usability or utility first depends on your definition of usability. For me, usability is more than the color of widgets and placement of text. Usability is about understanding, stating, and serving user needs. Since these needs are the requirements that shape the tool, they determine the utility. The design of excellent tools depends upon understanding how they will be used; therefore usability is a pre-requisite for successful utility. Position Statement John T. Stasko If the question is, "Which comes first, utility or usability?" my answer is "yes". Both notions are vitally important in the development of information visualization techniques and systems, and they are just two sides of the same coin. When the field of information visualization formed and first grew, the computer graphics and visualization aspects dominated. More recently, an increasing emphasis on the HCI aspects of the field has emerged as we strive to better understand how people can truly benefit from our ideas. When an information visualization technique is implemented in a system, the usability component is crucial. Poor interface design can hamper adoption and cloud the utility benefits that may be possible. In information visualization, usability typically does not equate with the common notion of a system being easy to learn. Information visualization systems are complex and they often will be used extensively for long periods of time. Consequently, making a system efficient and natural to use, making functions and operations visible, and simply paying attention to the user interface are key components. This is especially true in systems where interaction and multiple views are essential. For any information visualization technique to be adopted beyond the initial idea generation, there must be some utility or value in that technique. Our field is not about making pretty pictures. It is about helping people with the complex tasks involved in data analysis and understanding. We need to do a better job of articulating the cognitive tasks that occur in data analysis (location, correlation, emphasis, association, etc.) and articulating how information visualization techniques and systems can help with these tasks. Ultimately, a kind of natural selection will occur: systems with utility and value will be adopted and used, while others will quietly fade away.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可用性和实用性哪个更重要?
当提出一些新模型、新理论、新研究或新的可视化时,经常被问到的问题包括:它有多有用或有多可用?你做过任何测试吗?可视化是一种界面技术,因此不仅包括软件算法和技术,还包括人机交互问题。这使得它从两个方面进行借鉴,一个更关注实用性,另一个更关注可用性。发展新理论的一个关键步骤是尝试先解决一个问题。这个问题或问题不包括可用性部分;在某些领域,从大多数人的角度来看,它甚至可能不包含实用程序。我们讨论了问题的两个方面,以阐明每个方面在开发新的可视化技术中的作用。在HCI文献中,人们可以找到这样的研究结论:易用性比有用性更重要(Hubona & Blanton 1996),反之亦然(Liao and Landry 2000),易用性对女性更重要,而有用性对男性更重要(Yuen and Ma 2002)。在这个小组的贡献中,我们将介绍几个信息可视化系统的用户研究,范围从封闭问题的实验室实验到管理数据分析师的纵向采用研究(Gonzales & Kobsa, 2003;Kobsa 2001,2003;Mark et al. 2003)。-------------------------------------------a e-mail: grinstein@cs.uml.edu e-mail: kobsa@uci.edu e-mail: plaisant@cs.umd.edu e-mail: ben@cs.umd.edu e-mail statsko@cc.gatech.edu与一般的HCI研究一致,结果表明两个因素在某些情况下都很重要,但并不表明一个因素明显优于另一个因素。飞机比捷豹、山地自行车或儿童滑板车更好吗?这完全取决于你要去哪里,你的旅行目标是什么,你的年龄,你在路上会遇到什么地形,你可以花多长时间学习,以及许多其他参数。所有这些交通工具都相当好用,但除了成年人使用滑板车外,它们都需要训练,而且它们的效用因任务和使用者的功能而有很大差异。普通的汽车司机受益于多年的人为因素工程和大量的标准化,使他们能够很快地从皮卡车切换到敞篷车。类似地,可视化工具的成功取决于它在多大程度上满足它试图服务的用户的需求,以及他们想要完成的任务。如果实用性可能是专家工具(例如,发现任务需要数天的数据检查和操作)的第一位,可用性必须是要求“即时可用性”的公共访问信息系统(例如,人口普查统计数据的交互式显示)的第一位,否则用户会沮丧地离开。可用性设计原则意味着设计人员和评估人员了解用户的需求,以决定两种实用性或可用性中哪一种优先考虑,并设置所需的实用性和可用性级别。实用性和可用性都是可实现的目标,它们使彼此更加强大。像其他人一样,我们马里兰大学一直在开发可视化技术,多年来一直在努力寻找评估其好处的最佳方法。许多评估都是受控实验,我们发现最有用的评估是多方面的,包括定性和定量的测量或表现,偏好和可学习性,我将展示我们研究中的例子。我们还经常发现,在实验过程中收集到的观察结果可以与收集到的测量结果一样提供信息。最近,我们一直在推动基准数据集和任务的开发,以便更好地比较工具和技术。我们参与了第一届InfoVis竞赛,该竞赛要求提交树木两两比较的案例研究。提供了三对数据集:philogenies, classification和file system usage data,第14届IEEE可视化会议(VIS ' 03) 605 Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS ' 03) 0-7695-2030-8/03 $ 17.00©2003 IEEE和描述的开放式任务。被接受的提交将播种一个在线存储库,可以随着时间的推移增加额外的数据集,任务,案例研究和控制实验结果。我将报告比赛的结果,并反思评估存储库和基准数据集如何帮助我们理解如何判断工具的可用性和实用性。这个竞赛的网址是:http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/iv03contest/立场声明Ben Shneiderman对于可用性还是实用性这个问题的答案首先取决于你对可用性的定义。对我来说,可用性不仅仅是小部件的颜色和文本的位置。可用性是关于理解、陈述和满足用户需求的。 由于这些需求是塑造工具的需求,因此它们决定了工具的实用性。优秀工具的设计取决于理解如何使用它们;因此,可用性是成功实用程序的先决条件。如果问题是“实用性和可用性哪个更重要?”我的回答是“是”。这两个概念在信息可视化技术和系统的开发中都是至关重要的,它们只是同一枚硬币的两面。在信息可视化领域形成和发展初期,计算机图形学和可视化方面占主导地位。最近,随着我们努力更好地理解人们如何才能真正从我们的想法中受益,人们越来越重视该领域的HCI方面。当在系统中实现信息可视化技术时,可用性组件是至关重要的。糟糕的界面设计可能会阻碍采用,并使可能实现的实用效益变得模糊不清。在信息可视化中,可用性通常不等同于系统易于学习的一般概念。信息可视化系统是复杂的,它们往往将被广泛使用很长一段时间。因此,使系统高效和自然地使用,使功能和操作可见,并简单地关注用户界面是关键的组成部分。在交互和多视图必不可少的系统中尤其如此。对于任何信息可视化技术,要在最初的想法产生之外采用,该技术必须具有某些效用或价值。我们的领域不是要拍漂亮的照片。它是关于帮助人们完成涉及数据分析和理解的复杂任务。我们需要更好地阐明数据分析中出现的认知任务(位置、相关性、重点、关联等),并阐明信息可视化技术和系统如何帮助完成这些任务。最终,一种自然选择将发生:具有效用和价值的系统将被采用和使用,而其他系统将悄然消失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Voxels on fire [computer animation] Chameleon: an interactive texture-based rendering framework for visualizing three-dimensional vector fields Fast volume segmentation with simultaneous visualization using programmable graphics hardware Adaptive design of a global opacity transfer function for direct volume rendering of ultrasound data Visualization experiences and issues in deep space exploration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1