The following article documents an iterative, user-oriented process to develop a nutrition education website for a rural multicultural population. Study participants were purposefully recruited from a six-county region in Southern Colorado and Northern New Mexico representing the range of ethnic backgrounds, demographics and computer experience of the site's target audience. Three studies are presented. Study one, using a card-sorting process produced a basic shallow and broad structure for the website. Study two, using verbal protocol analysis of the prototype website identified six recurring problems and Study three, using verbal protocol analysis of the nearly completed website identified nine recurring problems. The website was redesigned to eliminate the problems and recommendations were provided for training users.
Bethke, F. (1983). Measuring the usability of software manuals. Technical Communication, 32(2), 13-16.
2.
Bloom, B.S., Anderson, L.W., & Sosniak ( 1994). Excerpts from the `Taxonomy of educational objectives: The Classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. In L. W. Anderson & Sosniak (Eds.), Bloom's Taxonomy: A forty-year retrospective: Ninety-third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 9-27). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Buller, D.B., Woodall, W.G., Zimmerman, D.E., Deimendinger, J., Rogers, E., Slater, M.D., Hau, B.A., Pepper, J.I., Bartlett-Horch, Burris-Woodall, P.A., Dignam, M.B., Hines, J., & LeBlanc ( 2001). Formative research activities to provide Web-based nutrition education to adults in the upper Rio Grande Valley. Family & Community Health, 24(3), 1-12.
4.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H.A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
5.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H.A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
6.
Fucella, J., & Pizzolato, J. (1999). Giving people what they want: How to involve users in site design. Accessed 26 June 2001 from http://www.-106.ibm.com/developerw...ign-by-feedback/expectations.html
7.
Grice, R., & Ridgway, L.S. (1989). A discussion of modes and motives for usability evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication , 32(4), 230-237.
8.
IBM . (2001). Accessed 29 June 2001 from http://www.-3.ibm.com/ibm/easy/eou_ext.nsf/publish/558
9.
Jacko, J.A., & Salvendy, G. (1996). Hierarchical menu design: Breadth, depth and task complexity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 1187-1201.
10.
Larson, K., & Czerwinski, M. (1998). Web page design: Implications of memory, structure and scent for information retrieval. In proceedings of CHI, 1998 (pp. 25-32). Los Angeles, CA: ACM Press.
11.
Microsoft . (2001). Accessed 28 June 2001 from http://microsoft.com/usability
Moore, M., Eyre, J., & Rideout, R. (1986). Testing software installation procedures: An integrated approach. Proceedings of the 33rd International Technical Communication Conference (pp. 377-380). Arlington, VA: Society of Technical Communication.
14.
National Cancer Institute. (2001). National Cancer Institute: Improving the communication of cancer research, 21 June. Accessed 27 June 2001 from http://www.usability.gov/
15.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Boston, MA: AP Professional.
16.
Preece, J. (1993). A guide to usability. Wokingham, England/Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
17.
Shackel, B., & Richardson, S. (1991). Human factors for informatics usability. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Sun. (2001). Accessed 29 June 2001 from http://www.sun.comusability
19.
Van Someren, M.W., Barnard, Y.F., & Sandberg, J.A.C. (1994). The think aloud method . Boston, MA: Academic Press, Harcourt Brace.
20.
Warren, T. (1988). Readers and microcomputers: Approaches to increase usability. Technical communication, 35(3), 188-192.
21.
Zaphiris, P., & Mtei, L. (1997). Depth vs. breadth in the arrangement of Web links . Available at http://otal.umd.edu/SHORE
22.
Zimmerman, D., & Shimoda, T. (1990). A usability assessment of the documentation and online instructions for the H-P System 10. Fort Collins : Journalism & Technical Communication Department. Center for Research on Writing & Communication Technologies.
