Mining until it hurts: automatic extraction of usability issues from online reviews compared to traditional usability evaluation

Steffen Hedegaard, Jakob Grue Simonsen

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Large amounts of data available on the web, for example reviews, tweets, and forum postings, contain user narratives on interaction with products. Finding usability issues in such user narratives offers an interesting alternative to traditional usability testing. To leverage such data for identifying usability issues, we (I) devise a methodology for building automated extraction tools for usability issues; (II) perform empirical assessment of such tools by training a number of classifiers to extract sentences describing usability issues for two digital cameras and a children's tablet; (III) perform quantitative and qualitative comparisons between the usability issues identified by the classifiers and those identified and assessed by two traditional methods: heuristic evaluation and think aloud testing. Our results show that it is possible to build and train algorithms for extracting actionable usability issues, but raise serious concerns about the practical future prospects for supplementing traditional evaluation methods with automated extraction algorithms.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction : Fun, Fast, Foundational
Number of pages10
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery
Publication date26 Oct 2014
Pages157-166
ISBN (Print)978-1-4503-2542-4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 26 Oct 2014
EventNordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2014 - Helsinki, Finland
Duration: 26 Oct 201430 Oct 2014
Conference number: 8

Conference

ConferenceNordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2014
Number8
Country/TerritoryFinland
CityHelsinki
Period26/10/201430/10/2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Mining until it hurts: automatic extraction of usability issues from online reviews compared to traditional usability evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this