Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Mari Tyllinen

dblp:58/7179 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
0000-0003-1531-2624ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Usability and user experience research · 91% Health and well-being technologies · 9%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Usability and user experience research › usability inspection
heuristic evaluation
0.212016
We Need Numbers!: Heuristic Evaluation during Demonstrations (HED) for Measuring Usability in IT System Procurement · CHI 2016
Usability and user experience research
usability evaluation
0.212016
We Need Numbers!: Heuristic Evaluation during Demonstrations (HED) for Measuring Usability in IT System Procurement · CHI 2016

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

user scenarios · 0.2heuristic evaluation during demonstrations · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 We Need Numbers!: Heuristic Evaluation during Demonstrations (HED) for Measuring Usability in IT System Procurement
abstract
We introduce a new usability inspection method called HED (heuristic evaluation during demonstrations) for measuring and comparing usability of competing complex IT systems in public procurement. The method presented enhances traditional heuristic evaluation to include the use context, comprehensive view of the system, and reveals missing functionality by using user scenarios and demonstrations. HED also quantifies the results in a comparable way. We present findings from a real-life validation of the method in a large-scale procurement project of a healthcare and social welfare information system. We analyze and compare the performance of HED to other usability evaluation methods used in procurement. Based on the analysis HED can be used to evaluate the level of usability of an IT system during procurement correctly, comprehensively and efficiently.
Mari Tyllinen, Johanna Viitanen, Tinja Lääveri, Marko Nieminen
CHI1