Augmented reality (AR) usage has increased substantially in recent years due to the proliferation of smart phone technology. Retail companies have leveraged augmented reality by allowing users to view products in their space before they buy. Because usability is related to return on investment (Marcus, 2005; Nielsen et al., 2013), ensuring the usability of these products is vital. One way to accomplish this is through heuristic analyses (Tan et al., 2009). While there are many time-tested sets of heuristics (Nielsen, 1994; Schneiderman & Plaisant, 2004), these often fail to address many of the interactions that are unique to AR (Derby & Chaparro, 2021). In this paper, we demonstrate the viability of supplementing traditional heuristic analyses (Nielsen, 1994) with a new heuristic checklist designed specifically for augmented and mixed reality (Derby & Chaparro, In Press) by evaluating a retail AR program.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AntonioliM.BlakeC.SparksK. (2014). Augmented reality applications in education. The Journal of technology studies, 96-107.
2.
AultmanA.DowieS.HamidN. A. (2018, April). Design Heuristics for Mobile Augmented Reality Game User Interfaces. In Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–5)
3.
BatagodaM. (2019). A New Usability Heuristic Evaluation Checklist. Medium.
4.
BevanN.MacleodM. (1994). Usability measurement in context. Behaviour & Information Technology, 13(1-2), 132-145.
5.
GuimaraesM. D. P.MartinsV. F. (2014, May). A checklist to evaluate augmented reality applications. In 2014 XVI Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (pp. 45-52). IEEE.
6.
DerbyJ. L.ChaparroB. S. (in press). The Development and Validation of an AR/MR Usability Heuristic Checklist. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham.
7.
DerbyJ. L.ChaparroB. S. (2021). The Challenges of Evaluating the Usability of Augmented Reality (AR). In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 994-998). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
8.
EndsleyT. C.SprehnK. A.BrillR. M.RyanK. J.VincentE. C.MartinJ. M. (2017, September). Augmented Reality design heuristics: Designing for dynamic interactions. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 2100-2104). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
9.
FordS.SchotzJ.MontalvoF. (2021) Individuation-based usability of a customized e-commerce platform. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 65(1), 908-912.
10.
FranklinF.BreyerF.KelnerJ. (2014, May). Usability heuristics for collaborative augmented reality remote systems. In 2014 XVI Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (pp. 53–62). IEEE.
11.
GaleN.Mirza-BabaeiP.PedersenI. (2015, October). Heuristic guidelines for playful wearable augmented reality applications. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (pp. 529–534).
JeffriesR.MillerJ. R.WhartonC.UyedaK. (1991, March). User interface evaluation in the real world: a comparison of four techniques. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 119-124).
14.
KalalahtiJ. (2015). Developing usability evaluation heuristics for augmented reality applications
15.
KhajoueiR.GohariS. H.MirzaeeM. (2018). Comparison of two heuristic evaluation methods for evaluating the usability of health information systems. Journal of biomedical informatics, 80, 37-42.
16.
KimJ.ForsytheS. (2008). Sensory enabling technology acceptance model (SE-TAM): A multiple-group structural model comparison. Psychology & Marketing, 25(9), 901-922
17.
KoS. M.ChangW. S.JiY. G. (2013). Usability principles for augmented reality applications in a smartphone environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 29(8), pp. 501-515
18.
LabrieA.ChengJ. (2020). Adapting usability heuristics to the context of mobile augmented reality. In Adjunct Publication of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 4-6).
19.
MarcusA. (2005). User interface design’s return on investment: Examples and statistics. In Cost-justifying usability (pp. 17-39). Morgan Kaufmann.
20.
MarotoM.CañoE.GonzálezP.VillegasD. (2018). Head-up Displays (HUD) in driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.08383.
NielsenJ.LevyJ. (1994). Measuring usability: preference vs. performance. Communications of the ACM, 37(4), 66-75.
25.
NielsenJ.MackR. L. (Eds.) (1994). Usability inspection methods. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
26.
NielsenJ.MolichR. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 249-256).
27.
NielsenJ.BergerJ. M.GilutzS.WhitentonK. (2013). Return on Investment (ROI) for Usability.
28.
OhH.YoonS. Y.ShyuC. R. (2008). How can virtual reality reshape furniture retailing?. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 26(2), 143-163.
29.
PoushnehA.Vasquez-ParragaA. Z. (2017). Discernible impact of augmented reality on retail customer’s experience, satisfaction and willingness to buy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 229-234.
30.
RosenbergL. B. (1992). The Use of Virtual Fixtures as Perceptual Overlays to Enhance Operator Performance in Remote Environments. Stanford Univ Ca Center for Design Research.
31.
SantosC.MirandaB.AraujoT.CarneiroN.MarquesA.MotaM.MeiguinsB. (2016). Guidelines for graphical user interface design in mobile augmented reality applications. In International Conference on Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality (pp. 71–80). Springer, Cham.
32.
ShneidermanB.PlaisantC. (2004). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective Human-Computer Interaction (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
TanW. S.LiuD.BishuR. (2009). Web evaluation: Heuristic evaluation vs. user testing. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(4), 621-627.
35.
TangS. L.KwohC. K.TeoM. Y.SingN. W.LingK. V. (1998). Augmented reality systems for medical applications. IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine, 17(3), 49-58.
