Time and money limitations normally make it impossible to do usability testing on every document, particularly by the method of controlled observation of users performing set tasks. I describe approaches that are intended to make the feedback from testing useful to more writers than just those who wrote the tested documents, and that gradually improve the corporate wisdom available to writers. Methods of approaching these goals include judicious selection of what to test and how, special empirical studies on issues of general importance, improving the quality of a company's prescriptive rules, and better ways of making new knowledge known and available to writers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
RameyJ., Usability Testing: Conducting the Test Procedure Itself, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Professional Communication, pp. 127–130, 1987.
2.
WengerM. J. and SpyridakisJ. H., The Relevance of Reliability and Validity to Usability Testing, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32:4, pp. 265–271, 1989.
3.
GriceR. A. and RidgwayL. S., A Discussion of Modes and Motives for Usability Evaluation, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32:4, pp. 230–237, 1989.
4.
GouldJ. D. and LewisC., Designing for Usability: Key Principles and What Designers Think, Communications of the ACM, 28:3, pp. 300–311, 1985.
5.
NielsenJ., Usability Engineering at a Discount, Designing and Using Human-computer Interfaces and Knowledge-based Systems: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2, pp. 394–401, 1989.
6.
DieliM., The Usability Process: Working with Iterative Design Principles, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32:4, pp. 272–278, 1989.
7.
HarrisR. A., A Do-It-Yourself Usability Kit, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 21:4, pp. 351–368, 1992.
8.
TufteE. R., The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1983.
