See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/256472542

Studiu de caz în evaluarea formativă a utilizabilităţii unui sit web din

administraţia publică locală

Article · January 2010

CITATIONS READS

2 297

4 authors:

Dragoş Daniel Iordache Ruxandra Dora Marinescu

The National Institute for Research & Development in Informatics 2 PUBLICATIONS   19 CITATIONS   
62 PUBLICATIONS   337 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Maria Gheorghe-Moisii Costin Pribeanu

National Institute for Research & Development in Informatics - ICI Bucharest Academy of Romanian Scientists
30 PUBLICATIONS   94 CITATIONS    168 PUBLICATIONS   1,096 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Methods and models of social networking evaluation as tools to facilitate training activities View project

Exploring Facebook's acceptance and use (TAM, UTAUT). Multi-criteria decision making. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Costin Pribeanu on 21 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

Studiu de caz vQHYDOXDUHDIRUPDWLYăD XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL unui

sit ZHEGLQDGPLQLVWUDĠLDSXEOLFăORFDOă

'UDJRú'DQLHO,RUGDFKH, Ruxandra Dora Marinescu, Maria Gheorghe-Moisii, Costin Pribeanu

,QVWLWXWXO1DĠLRQDOGH&HUFHWDUH-'H]YROWDUHvQ,QIRUPDWLFă± I&,%XFXUHúWL
%G0DUHúDO$YHUHVFXQU-%XFXUHúWL
{iordache, doruma, maria, pribeanu}@ici.ro

REZUMAT
8WLOL]DELOLWDWHD DSOLFDĠLLORU LQIRUPDWLFH GLQ DGPLQLVWUDĠLD
SXEOLFă HVWH R FHULQĠă SULRULWDUă SHQWUX LPSOHPHQWDUHD FX
VXFFHV D VRFLHWăĠLL LQIRUPDĠLRQDOH 'LQ SăFDWH SH SODQ
QDĠLRQDO nu H[LVWă vQFă R SUDFWLFă FXUHQWă GH HYDOXDUH D
SURGXVHORULQIRUPDWLFHvQDLQWHGHDILLQVWDODWHODXWLOL]DWRU
úL QLFL HYDOXDWRUL FX H[SHULHQĠă vQ XWLOL]DELOLWDWH 6FRSXO
acestui articol este de a prezenta o metodologiH úL XQ
VWXGLX GH FD] vQ HYDOXDUHD IRUPDWLYă D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
VLWXULORU ZHE GLQ DGPLQLVWUDĠLD SXEOLFă 3URFHGXUD GH
HYDOXDUHVHED]HD]ăSHGRXăPHWRGHHYDOXDUHHXULVWLFăúL
testare cu utilizatori.
Cuvinte cheie
Utilizabilitate, HYDOXDUHIRUPDWLYăHYDOXDUHHXULVWLFă.
Clasificare ACM
D.2.2: Design tools and techniques. H5.2 User interfaces.
INTRODUCERE
,Q PRPHQWXO GH IDĠă FDOLWDWHD SURGXVHORU úL VHUYLFLLORU
LQIRUPDWLFHHVWHRFHULQĠăSULRULWDUăSHQWUXLPSOHPHQWDUHD
FX VXFFHV D VRFLHWăĠLL LQIRUPDĠLRQDOH. Acest deziderat
QHFHVLWă R DERUGDUH FHQWUDWă SH XWLOL]DWRU D SURFHVXOXL GH
SURLHFWDUHFDUHVăFRQGXFăODRvPEXQăWăĠLUHVXEVWDQĠLDOăD
VHDQDOL]HD]ăFRPSDUDWLYUH]XOWDWHOHREĠLQXWHvQHYDOXDUHD
DFHOXLDúLVLWZHEGLQDGPLQVWUDĠLDSXEOLFăORFDOăFXILHFDUH
GLQWUHFHOHGRXăPHWRGH
5HVWXODFHVWXLDUWLFROHVWHRUJDQL]DWGXSăFXPXUPHD]ă,Q
VHFĠLXQHDXUPăWRDUHsHSUH]LQWăFkWHYDSUHRFXSăULUHFHQWH
úL WHQGLQĠH DFWXDOH vQ HYDOXDUHD XWLOL]DELOLWăĠii. Accentul
HVWHSXVSHSUREOHPDWLFDDVRFLDWăFXHYDOXDUHDIRUPDWLYăD
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL VFRSXO HYDOXăULL PHWRGH XWLOL]DWH PăVXUL
coleFWDWHúLPRGGHGHVFULHUHFRQVROLGDUHDSUREOHPHORUGH
XWLOL]DELOLWDWHJUDGXOGHvQFUHGHUHúLYDOLGLWDWH,QFHDGHD
WUHLD VHFĠLXQH VH SUH]LQWă VXFFLQW PHWRGRORJLD (elemente
caracteristice)VWXGLXOGHFD]úLVHDQDOL]HD]ăUH]XOWDWHOHúL
limitele studiulXL /XFUDUHD VH vQFKHLH FX FRQFOX]LL úL
GLUHFĠLLGHFRQWLQXDUHDFHUFHWăULORU
35(2&83Ă5,ù,7(1',1ğ($&78$/(
EvaluarHDIRUPDWLYăDXWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
SisWHPHOH LQWHUDFWLYH VXQW SURLHFWDWH vQ PRG LWHUDWLY (VWH
dificil, practic imposibil, parcurgerea etapelor din ciclul de
GH]YROWDUH R VLQJXUă GDWă In acest sens, metodele de
HYDOXDUHIRUPDWLYăDXWLOL]DELOLWăĠLLVXQWXWLOL]DWHvQFDGUXO
unei bucle de proiectare - evaluare.
2SUREOHPăGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWHDIRVWGHILQLWăFDRULFHDVSHFW
DO LQWHUIHĠHL FX XWLOLzatorul despre care se presupune (se
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLLDSOLFDĠLLORULQIRUPDWLFH
3HSODQQDĠLRQDOutilizabilitatea este un subiect de interes
vQ FDGUXO XQor proiecte de cercetare [1, 8, 22]. NX H[LVWă
vQFă R SUDFWLFă FXUHQWă GH HYDOXDUH D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
SURGXVHORULQIRUPDWLFHvQDLQWHGHDILLQVWDODWHODXWLOL]DWRU
úLQLFLHYDOXDWRULFXH[SHULHQĠăvQXWLOL]DELOLWDWH
,Q IXQFĠLH GH PRPHQWXO úL VFRSXO HYDOXăULL HYDOXDUHD
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL SRDWH IL IRUPDWLYă VDX VXPDWLYă (YDOXDUHD
IRUPDWLYă D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL HVWH HIHFWXDWă LWHUDWLY SH
SDUFXUVXO FLFOXOXL GH GH]YROWDUH D XQHL DSOLFDĠLL
LQIRUPDWLFH FX VFRSXO LGHQWLILFăULL úL UHPHGLHULL
problemelor de utilizaELOLWDWHFkWPDLGHYUHPH[24].
Scopul acestui articol este de a prezenta RPHWRGRORJLHúL
XQ VWXGLX GH FD] vQ HYDOXDUHD IRUPDWLYă D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
VLWXULORU ZHE GLQ DGPLQLVWUDĠLD SXEOLFă 3URFHGXUD GH
HYDOXDUHVHED]HD]ăSHGRXăPHWRGHHYDOXDUHHXULVWLFăúL
testare cu utilizatori.
0HWRGRORJLD D IRVW HODERUDWă vn cadrul unui proiect din
REVHUYă Fă DU FUHD XWLOL]DWRUXOXL GLILFXOWăĠL sau
QHPXOĠXPLUL, raportat la un indicator important al
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL XúXULQĠă vQ vQYăĠDUH XúXULQĠă vQ RSHUDUH
UDWăGHHURULVDWLVIDFĠLHVXELHFWLYă [18].
'XSă JUDGXO de severitate, DGLFă LPSDFWXO SH FDUH vO DX
GLILFXOWăĠLOH VDX QHPXOĠXPLULOH XWLOL]DWRUXOXL problemele
GHXWLOL]DELOLWDWHVHSRWFODVLILFDvQWUHLFDWHJRULL
x 6HYHUHSUREOHPHFDUHQXSHUPLWFDXWLOL]DWRUXOVă
vQGHSOLQHDVFăVDUFLQDVDXFDUHUH]XOWăvQSLHUGeri
importante de date sau timp.
x Moderate: probleme care au un impact semnificativ
DVXSUDvQGHSOLQLULLVDUFLQLLGDUSHQWUXFDUH
XWLOL]DWRUXOSRDWHJăVLRVROXĠLH
x Minore: probleme care sunt iritante pentru utilizator
dar care nu au un impact semnificativ asupra
vQGHSOLQLULLVDUFLQLL
'H UHJXOă vQ HYDOXDUHD IRUPDWLYă D XWLOL]ELOLWăĠLL VH
FROHFWHD]ă măVXUL FDQWLWDWLYH (QXPăUXO GH SUREOHPH GH
utilizabilitate pe niveluri de severitate: major, moderat úL
3ODQXO 6HFWRULDO GH FHUFHWDUH D 0&6, úL D IRVW DSRL minor úL PăVXUL FDOLWDWLYH (GHVFULHUHD GHWDOLDWă D fLHFăUHL
XWLOL]DWă FX URO H[SHULPHQWDO vQ SDWUX VWXGLL GH FD] GH probleme úLDFRQWH[WXOXLvQFDUHDSDUe).
HYDOXDUH HXULVWLFă úL GRXă VWXGLL GH FD] GH HYDOXDUH SULQ Ìntr-ROXFUDUHUHFHQWăHvannberg et al. [12], au utilizat un
tHVWDUHFXXWLOL]DWRUL,QFDGUXODFHVWHLOXFUăULVHSUH]LQWăúL format structurat de descriere, FDUHDIRVWDGDSWDWGXSă[4]

23
 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

úL FDUH FRQĠLQH : identificatorul problemei, descriere, HYDOXDUHD IRUPDWLYă D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL HVWH protocolul de
GLILFXOWăĠLOH vQWkPSLQDWH Ge utilizator, contextul specific © JkQGLUHFXYRFHWDUHª7$P ± Think Aloud Protocol).
ORFDOL]DUHD SUREOHPHL vQ LQWHUIDĠă FDX]HOH SRVLELOH FH Avantajele principale ale protocoluOXLJkQGLULLFXYRFHWDUH
DQXPHHVWHJUHúLWvQSURLHFWHXULVWLFLOHXWLOL]DWHúLJUDGXO
de severitate (impactul, pe trei niveluri PDMRUPRGHUDWúL
minor).
8Q DVSHFW LPSRUWDQW DO RULFăUHL DERUGăUL vQ HYDOXDUHD
IRUPDWLYă HVWH XWLOLWDWHD SH FDUH R DX UH]XOWDWHOH HYDOXăULL
DVXSUDSURFHVXOXLGHGH]YROWDUHÌQHVHQĠăvQWUHEDUHDHVWH
vQ FH PăVXUă UH]XOWDWHOH VXQW YDORULILFDWH XOWHULRU vQ
SURFHVXOGHSURLHFWDUHúLFDUHHVWHJUDGXOGHUHFXSHUDUH al
FRVWXULORUDFWLYLWăĠLLGHHYDOXDUH$úDFXPDUDWă0ROLFKHW
al. [16], raportul de evaluare WUHEXLH Vă ILH DWkW XWLO FkW úL
FRQVWDX vQWU-R PDL EXQă vQĠHOHJHUH D PRGHOXOXL PHQWDO DO
XWLOL]DWRUXOXL úL D LQWHUDFĠLXQLL FX SURGXVXO FH IDF
XWLOL]DWRULL GH FH IDF FHHD FH IDF úL FXP IDF [20]. TAP
SHUPLWH XWLOL]DWRULORU Vă H[SULPH vQWU-R VHFYHQĠă GH SDúL
cum XWLOL]HD]ă XQ SURGXV SHQWUX D vQGHSOLQL VDUFLQLOH
solicitate.
Studiile efectuate de Usability Professional Association ±
UPA [25,26] DUDWă Fă  vQ DQXO  FHOH PDL IUHFYHQW
utilizate metode vQ SUDFWLFD SURLHFWăULL FHQWUDWH SH
utilizator au fost studiile utilizator (anchete, interviuri)
utilizabil. Din acest motiv este QHFHVDUă LQFOXGHUHD vQ  HYDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă LQVSHFĠLL GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH 
descrierea problemelor de utilizabilitate, a UHFRPDQGăULlor úLWHVWDUHDFXXWLOL]DWRUL2FRPSDUDĠLHIDĠăGHVLWXDĠLD
de remediere. H[LVWHQWăvQDUDWăRVFăGHUHDSRQGHULLSHFDUHRDX
0HWRGHGHHYDOXDUHIRUPDWLYă XWLOL]DUHDHYDOXăULLHXULVWLFH- úLWHVWăULLFX XWLOL]DWRUL
3UREOHPHOH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH SRW IL LGHQWLILFDWH DWkW SULQ  úL  R FUHúWHUH D LQWHUHVXOXL IDĠă GH VWXGLLOH XWLOL]DWRU
LQVSHFĠLH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH HYDOXDUH GH WLS H[SHUW FkW úL
prin testare cu utilizatori HYDOXDUH FHQWUDWă SH XWLOizator).
,QWUH PHWRGHOH GH LQVSHFĠLH D utilizabilLWăĠLL, cele mai
cunoscute VXQW HYDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă LQVSHFĠLD FRJQLWLYă úL
HYDOXDUHDED]DWăSHUHFRPDQGăUL
(YDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă HVWH R PHWRGă HIHFWXDWă GH XQ QXPăU
redus de evaluatori, FDUH H[DPLQHD]ă R LQWHUIDĠă FX
XWLOL]DWRUXO MXGHFă UHVSHFWDUHD XQXL set de principii de
utilizabilitate (euristici) úL HODERUHD]ă R OLVWă GH SUREOHPH
de utilizabilitate clasificate pe categorii de severitate,
FRUHVSXQ]ăWRU LPSDFWXOXL HVWLPDW DVXSUD SHUIRUPDQĠHORU
XWLOL]DWRUXOXLVDXDFFHSWDQĠHL[15,18].
Setul de euristici utilizat este la alegerea analistului iar
UH]XOWDWHOH HYDOXăULL VXQW GHWHUPLQDWH vQ SULPXO UkQG GH
DELOLWăĠLOH DFHVWXLD GH D OH XWLOL]D In [12] au fost utilizate
DOWHUQDWLY GRXă VHWXUL GH SULQFLSLL HXULVWLFLOH OXL -DFRE
1LHOVHQ úL cele derivate din ingiQHULD FRJQLWLYă GH FăWUH
Gerhard-Powels [7] úL DX FRQFOX]LRQDW Fă DO dolia set
QHFHVLWă XQ SOXV GH H[SHULHQĠă %DVWLHQ úL 6FDSLQ [3] au
elaborat un set de criterii ergonomice, care poate fi folosit
DWkWSHQWUXSURLHFWDUHFkWúLSHQWUXHYDOXDUH8OWHULRUVetul
de criterii ergonomice a fost adaptat pentru situri web de
FRPHUĠ HOHFWURQLF úL pentru DSOLFDĠLL ED]DWH SH UHDOLWDWH
vPERJăĠLWăUHDOLWDWHYLUWXDOă [14, 2].
,QVWXGLXOIăFXWGH1LHOVHQ>19] au fost comparate 7 seturi
de euristici din perspectiva explLFăULL SUREOHPHORU GH
XWLOL]DELOLWDWH 2 DQDOL]ă IDFWRULDOă DUDWă Fă  GH IDFWRUL
(+1%).
Consolidarea problemelor de utilizabilitate
Consolidarea problemelor de utilizabilitate este o
DFWLYLWDWH LPSRUWDQWă D evaluăULL formative vQ FDUH VXQW
LPSOLFDĠLPDLPXOĠLHYDOXDWRUL úLDUHFDVFRSDJUHHUHDXQHL
liste unice de probleme de utilizabilitate. Consolidarea
presupune eliminarea duplicatelor, agreerea asupra
JUDGXOXL GH VHYHULWDWH úL D GHVFULHULL ILHFăUHL SUREOHPH vQ
parte. Ìn acest scop se pot folosi diferite metode [11].
Procesul de consolidare a problemelor de utilizabilitate
presupune GRXătipuri de RSHUDĠLL [13]:
x filtrarea: eliminarea duplicatelor din listele de
SUREOHPHLGHQWLILFDWHGHFăWUHXQVLQJXUHYDOXDWRU
x integrarea: combinarea problemelor de utilizabilitate
dintre diferite liste.
ÌQ FD]XO WHVWăULL FX XWLOL]DWRUL H[LVWă GRXă HWDSH GH
FRQVROLGDUH FRQVROLGDUH LQGLYLGXDOă úL FRQVROLGDUH
FRODERUDWLYăÌQILHFDUHHWDSăVHHIHFWXHD]ăGXSăFD]DWkW
RSHUDĠLLGHILOWUDUHFkWúLGHLQWHJUDUH
Ìn consoOLGDUHDLQGLYLGXDOăVHDQDOL]HD]ăGHFăWUHILHFDUH
evaluator, problemele de utilizabilitate identificate de mai
PXOĠL XWLOL]DWRUL Ìn a GRXD HWDSă, GRL VDX PDL PXOĠL
HYDOXDWRULFDUHDXXWLOL]DWDFHOHDúLUDSRDUWHGHWHVWDUHFDG
de acord asupra unei liste unice de probleme de
XWLOL]DELOLWDWHSHQWUXILHFDUHVDUFLQă
$VSHFWHSULYLQGJUDGXOGHvQFUHGHUH
FX R FRQWULEXĠLH GH SHVWH  ILHFDUH H[SOLFă  GLQ ,QXOWLPLDQLDXIRVWHIHFWXDWHQXPHURDVHFHUFHWăULSULYLQG
YDULDQĠă. Primi primii 7 fDFWRULFDUHJUXSHD]ăSHVWHGH YDOLGLWDWHD úL HILFDFLWDWHD PHWRGHORU GH HYDOXDUH D
HXULVWLFL H[SOLFă FFD  GLQ YDULDQĠă 'H DVHPHQHD
rezultatele studiului DUDWă Fă vQ SULPHOH  HXULVWLFL FDUH
H[SOLFă WRDWH SUREOHPHOH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH WUHL DSDUĠLQ
autorului, celelalte fiind din alte seturi. Procentajul de
SUREOHPHH[SOLFDWHYDULD]ăvQWUHúL
7HVWDUHD FX XWLOL]DWRUL HVWH GHILQLWă FD R PHWRGă HPSLULFă
GH HYDOXDUH D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL LPSOLFkQG SDUWLFLSDQĠL DYkQG
caracteristici apropiate de cele ale utilizatorilor reali ai
produsului care va fi evaluat. Prin testarea cu utilizatori se
vQUHJLVWUHD]ă FRPSRUWDPHQWXO XWLOL]DWRUXOXL FX DMXtorul
unor tehnici specifice cum sunt observarea sau
protocoalele verbale 2 WHKQLFă IUHFYHQW XWLOL]DWă vQ
24
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL ÌQFUHGHUHD VH UHIHUă OD PăVXUD vQ FDUH
HYDOXăULOH LQGHSHQGHQWH SURGXF DFHODúL UH]XOWDW
9DOLGLWDWHD VH UHIHUă OD PăVXUD vQ FDUH SUREOHPHOH
GHWHFWDWHvQFDGUXOHYDOXăULLVXQWDFHOHDúLFXFHOHFDUHDSDU
vQSUDFWLFDXWLOL]ăULLVLVWHPXOXL
3HQWUXPăVXUDUHDJUDGXOXLGHvQFUHGHUH se reFRPDQGăGRL
LQGLFDWRULUDWD GHGHWHFĠLHúL FRHILFLHQWXOGHDJUHHUH vQWUH
oricare doi evaluatori (any-two-agreement) [12].
ÌQVWXGLXOOXL&RQQHOOúL+DPPRQG[5], coeficientul mediu
de agreere a variat vQWUHúL
6WXGLXO IăFXW GH -DNRE 1LHOVHQ [17] arDWă Fă JUDGXO GH
vQFUHGHUH YDULD]ă PXOW vQ IXQFĠLH GH H[SHUWL]ă úL GH
 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

QXPăUXOGHHYDOXDWRULÌQPHGLHXQHYDOXDWRUvQFHSăWRUD produs specificat sau unor componente specificate ale unui

identificat 22% din problemele de utilizabilitate existente produs.
vQWU-R DSOLFDĠLH XQ HYDOXDWRU H[SULPHQWDW  DSURDSH 0HWRGRORJLD HODERUDWă vQ DFHVW SURLHFW LQWHJUHD]ă GRXă
dublu) iar uQHYDOXDWRUFXGXEOăH[SHUWL]ăXWLOL]DELOLWDWHúL PHWRGH GH HYDOXDUH IRUPDWLYă HYDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă úL
GRPHQLXODSOLFDĠLHLGLQSUREOHPHOHGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWH testarea cu utilizatori.
ÌQDFHODúLVWXGLXVHDUDWăFăvQPHGLHXQVLQJXUHYDOXDWRU $SOLFDUHD D GRXă WLSXUL GH PHWRGH GH HYDOXDUH IRUPDWLYă
vQFHSăWRULGHQWLILFăGLQSUREOHPHOHGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWH HVWHEHQHILFăGLQPDLPXOWHPRWLYH
trei evaluatori cca. 40% LDU  HYDOXDWRUL vQFHSăWRUL  
GLQSUREOHPHOHGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWH3HQWUXDGHSăúLSUDJXOGH x Complementaritatea metodelor.
HVWHQHYRLHGHRHFKLSăGHHYDOXDWRULIRDUWHPXOW x &UHúWHUHDJUDGXOXLGHvQFUHGHUHúLDYDOLGLWăĠLL
úL SUDFWLF LPSRVLELO GH DVLJXUDW Ìn mod similar, se
HVWLPHD]ă Fă HVWH VXILFLHQW XQ QXPăU GH  HYDOXDWori
H[SHULPHQWDĠL SHQWUX D LGHQWLILFD  úL  HYDOXDWRUL
H[SHULPHQWDĠL SHQWUX D LGHQWLILFD  GLQ SUREOHPHOH GH
utilizabilitate dintr-RLQWHUIDĠă
Aspecte privind validitatea
(YDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă SURGXFH XQ VHW GH SUREOHPH GH
utilizabilitate care sunt considerate anticipate vQ WLPS FH
WHVWDUHDFXXWLOL]DWRULLGHQWLILFăSUREOHPHGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWH
reale 'LIHUHQĠD vQWUH FHOH GRXă VHWXUL R UHSUH]LQWă
problemele fals pozitive (alarme false, identificate de
HYDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă dar neconfirmate de testarea cu
rezultatelor.
x &UHúWHUHDHILFLHQĠHLDFWLYLWăĠLLGHUHPHGLHUHD
problemelor de utilizabilitate.
x ÌPEXQăWăĠLUHD expertL]HLGHXWLOL]DUHDILHFăUHLPHWRGH
vQSDUWH
x 3UHJăWLUHDHYDOXăULLVXPDWLYH
0HWRGHOH VXQW FRPSOHPHQWDUH vQWUXFkW VH ED]HD]ă SH
WHVWDUHDGHFăWUHGRXăFDWHJRULLGHXWLOL]DWRUL
x ([SHUĠLvQXWLOL]DELOLWDWH
x Utilizatori reprezentativi.
3H GH DOWă SDUWH vQ FD]XO WHVWăULL FX XWLOL]DWRUL SRW IL
FROHFWDWH úL DOWH WLSXUL GH PăVXUL PăVXUL DOH HILFDFLWăĠLL
utilizatori úL fals negative (problemele de utilizabilitate UDWD GH vQGHSOLQLUH D VDUFLQLL QXPăUXO GH HURUL DOH
reale care nu au fost anticipate de HYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă).
3HQWUX PăVXUDUHD YDOLGLWăĠLL HILFDFLWăĠLL úL HILFLHQĠHL
HYDOXăULLeuristice au fost SURSXúLPDLPXOĠL indicatori [9]:
x validitate: probleme anticipate-confirmate / probleme
anticipate.
x completitudine (thoroughness): probleme anticipate-
confirmate / probleme reale
HILFLHQĠHLWLPSXOGHH[HFXĠLHúLVDWLVIDFĠLHLSULQ aplicarea
de chestionare, cu grad variabil de complexitate). In acest
IHO VH REĠLQ GDWH FDQWLWDWLYH  FDOLWDWLYH VXSOLPHQWDUH IDĠă
GHFHOHREĠLQXWHGHHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă
5HSHWDUHDHYDOXăULLFXRDOWăPHWRGăGDUXWLOL]kQGDFHODúL
set de sarcini relevaQWH DVWIHO vQFkW UH]XOWDWHOH Vă ILH
FRPSDUDELOHPăUHúWHvQFUHGHUHDvQUH]XOWDWHOHREĠLQXWH
x HILFDFLWDWHJHQHUDOăRYHUDOOHIIHFWLYHQHVV: validitate
* completitudine.
Calcularea acestor indicatori presupune evaluarea cu
DPEHOH PHWRGH SH ED]D DFHOXLDúL VFHQDULX GH XWLOL]DUH
IDSWFDUHPăUHúWHFRVWXULOHHYDOXăULL
0(72'2/2*,(ù,678',U DE CAZ
Componentele metodologei úLDFWLYLWăĠL de evaluare
0HWRGRORJLD HODERUDWă vQ DFHVW SURLHFW UHVSHFWă
prevederile standardului ISO/IEC 14598-5:1998 privind
structura unui proces de evaluare :
x 6WDELOLUHDFHULQĠHORUGHHYDOXDUHVWDELOLUHDVFRSXOXL
HYDOXăULLDSURGXVHORUĠLQWăúLVSHFLILFDUHDPRGHOXOXL
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
x 6SHFLILFDUHDHYDOXăULLVSHFLILFDUHDSURGXVXOXLĠLQWăD
contextXOXLúLVFHQDULLORUGHXWLOL]DUHDOHJHUHD
PHWRGHORUúLWHKQLFLORUVHOHFWDUHDPHWULFLORU
VWDELOLUHDQLYHOXULORUGHDSUHFLHUHSHQWUXDFHVWHDúL
VWDELOLUHDFHULQĠHORUGHPăVXUDUH
x 3URLHFWDUHDHYDOXăULLHODERUDUHDSODQXOXLGHHYDOXDUH
x ([HFXWDUHDHYDOXăULLPăVXUDUHDFDUDFWHULVWLFLORU
)LHFDUH GLQWUH FHOH GRXă PHWRGH QHFHVLWă FRPSHWHQĠH
VSHFLILFH &RPSDUDUHD UH]XOWDWHORU REĠLQXWH SHUPLWH
DQDOL]D SURFHGXULL LGHQWLILFDUHD JUHúHOLORU GH HYDOXDUH úL
vPEXQăWăĠLUHD SUDFWLFLL GH HYDOXDUH 9DOLGDUHD UH]XOWDWHORU
HYDOXăULL HXULVWLFH SULQ WHVWDUH FX XWLOL]DWRUL SHUPLWH úL R
FRPSDUDĠLHFRUHFWăDUH]XOWDWHORUREĠLQXWHGHFăWUHILHFDUH
H[SHUW vQ SDUWH IDSW FDUH vPEXQătăĠHúWH H[SHUWL]D
LQGLYLGXDOă
MetodoloJLD LQWHJUDWă GH HYDOXDUH D XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
FXSULQGHXUPăWRDUHOHDFWLYLWăĠL
x 6SHFLILFDUHDHYDOXăULLDQDOL]DFHULQĠHORUGHHYDOXDUH
VSHFLILFDUHDVDUFLQLORUGHWHVWDUHSODQLILFDUHDúL
SUHJăWLUHDHYDOXăULLVSHFLILFDUHDPRGHOXOXL
XWLOL]DELOLWăĠLL
x EvaOXDUHDHXULVWLFă6HXWLOL]HD]ăVHWXOH[WLQVGH
criterii ergonomice care este aplicat prin verificarea
vQGHSOLQLULLUHFRPDQGăULORUGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWHÌn acest
VHQVHYDOXDUHDDUHXQFDUDFWHUVLVWHPDWLFúL
structurat.
x Evaluarea prin testare cu utilizatori. Comportamentul
XWLOL]DWRULORUHVWHvQUHJLVWUDWDXGLROLPLWDUHLPSXVă
FROHFWDUHDGDWHORUúLDQDOL]DSUHOLPLQDUăD
rezultatelor.
x &RQFOX]LDHYDOXăULLILQDOL]DUHDDQDOL]HLúLUDSRUWDUHD
rezultatelor.
ÌQ JHQHUDO R PHWRGă GH HYDOXDUH HVWH R SURFHGXUă FDUH
GHVFULH DFĠLXQLOH H[HFXWDWH GH FăWUH HYDOuator pentru a
REĠLQHUH]XOWDWXOPăVXUăULLVDXYHULILFăULLVSHFLILFDWHDXQXL
25
GHUHVXUVHOHWHKQLFHDFKL]LĠLRQDWHSULQSURLHFWúLSULQ
REVHUYDUH6HXWLOL]HD]ăSURWRFROXOÄJkQGLUHFXYRFH
WDUH´ÌQUHJLVWUăULOHVXQWDSRLDQDOL]DWHGHHYDOXDWRUL
FDUHH[WUDJúLGRFXPHQWHD]ăSUREOHPHOHGH
utilizabilitate.
x $QDOL]DFRPSDUDWLYăDUH]XOWDWHORUREĠLQXWHSULQFHOH
GRXăPHWRGHFDOFXODUHDLQGLFDWRULORUGHYDOLGLWDWH
FRPSOHWLWXGLQHúLHILFLHQĠăDHYDOXăULLHXULVWLFH
 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

$YkQG vQ YHGHUH SUDFWLFD FXUHQWă vQ HYDOXDUHD 6WXGLXGHFD]vQHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă

utilizabilităĠLLDQDOL]DFHULQĠHORUGHHYDOXDUHúLVSHFLILFDUHD 2ELHFWXO HYDOXăULL D IRVW VLWXO ZHE DO 3ULPăULHL RUDúXOXL
HYDOXăULL DX IRVW LQWHJUDWH vQWU-R VLQJXUă DFWLYLWDWH FDUH 3LWHúWLDIODWODDGUHVDZHEhttp://www.primariapitesti.ro.
SUHFHGH DSOLFDUHD FHORU GRXă PHWRGH ÌQ DFHDVWă HWDSă
SODQLILFDUHD HYDOXăULL VH UHIHUă OD RUGLQHD WHPSRUDOă D Sarcinile stabilite pentru evaluare sunt cele din Tabelul 2.
DSOLFăULLFHORUGRXăPHWRGH Tabelul 2. Sarcini de testare
RezXOWDWHOHREĠLQXWHVHDQDOL]HD]ăGLQGRXăSHUVSHFWLYH 1. (T1) Disponibilitatea documentelor
2. Consultare formulare/acte
x $GH]YROWDWRUXOXLFDUHWUHEXLHVăHIHFWXH]H
3. Accesare documente
remedierea GHILFLHQĠHORUFRQVWDWDWHODHYDOXDUH 4. Completare formulare
x $HYDOXDWRUXOXLFDUHWUHEXLHVăDQDOL]H]HHILFDFLWDWHD 5. 7ÌQUHJLVWUDUHFOLHQWQRX pentru plata online
úLHILFLHQĠDDFWLYLWăĠLLGHHYDOXDUH 6. ÌQUHJLVWUDUHFOLHQW
Analiza comparDWLYă VH FRPSOHWHD]ă FX R GLVFXĠLH DVXSUD 7. Accesare cont
SHUIRUPDQĠHORUGHHYDOXDUHFXILHFDUHPHWRGăDWkWODQLYHO 8. Solicitare ajutor
LQGLYLGXDO UDWă LQGLYLGXDOă GH GHWHFĠLH FkW úL OD QLYHO GH
HFKLSăUDWăPHGLHGHGHWHFĠLHúLFRHILFLHQWGHagreare). (YDOXDUHDDIRVWUHDOL]DWăvQSHULRDGDPDL-noiembrie 2009
(YDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă D IRVW HIHFWXDWă FX XQ VHW GH  GH GHFăWUHRHFKLSăIRUPDWăGLQHYDOXDWRUL
euristici VWUXFWXUDW vQ  FDWHJRULL FULWHULL HUJRQRPLFH 5H]XOWDWHOH REĠLQXWH GXSă LGHQWLILFDUHD LQGLYLGXDOă D
JHQHUDOHúLFDUHHVWHSUH]HQWDWvQ7DEHOXO SUREOHPHORUGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWHVXQWSUH]HQWDWHvQ7DEHOXO3.
Tabelul 1. Euristici de evaluare Tabelul 3 Probleme de utilizabilitate identificate pe evaluator
Ghidarea utilizatorului 6DUFLQă Total Din care majore
1 9L]LELOLWDWHDVWăULLVLVWHPXOXL Ev1 Ev2 Ev3 Ev4 Ev1 Ev2 Ev3 Ev4
2 Incitare (prompting) T1 5 5 3 5 3 1 2 1
3 Feedback imediat T2 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1
4 *UXSDUHGLVWLQFĠLHSULQIRUPDW Total 7 9 4 6 5 5 3 2
5 *UXSDUHGLVWLQFĠLHSULQDPSODVDUH
6 Lizibilitate $úDFXPVHREVHUYăSULPXOHYDOXDWRUDLGHQWLILFDWvQWRWDO
Efort de operare 12 probleme de utilizabilitate (5 majore), al doilea
7 Concizie HYDOXDWRUD LGHQWLILFDWvQWRWDOSUREOHPH  PDMRUHDO
8 5HFXQRDúWHUHvQORFGHUHDPLQWLUH WUHLOHD HYDOXDWRU D LGHQWLILFDW vQ WRWDO  SUREOHPH 
9 $FĠLXQLPLQLPDOH majore) LDU DO SDWUXOHD HYDOXDWRU D LGHQWLILFDW vQ WRWDO 
10 'HQVLWDWHDLQIRUPDĠLHL probleme (2 majore).
$GDSWDELOLWDWHúLFRQWURO
11 FlexibilitaWHDúLHILFLHQĠDXWLOL]ăULL
Listele individuale de probleme de utilizabilitate au fost
12 *UDGXOGHH[SHULHQĠă FRQVROLGDWH SH VDUFLQD SH ED]D FULWHULXOXL ÄPRGLILFăUL
13 $FĠLXQLH[SOLFLWH VLPLODUH´ ÌQ WRWDO OLVWD FRQVROLGDWă GH SUREOHPH GH
14 Controlul utilizatorului utilizabilitate cuprinde 20 de probleme de utilizabilitate
Management erori dintre care 5 probleme majore. /LVWD HVWH SUH]HQWDWă vQ
15 Prevenirea erorilor Tabelul 3.
16 Calitatea mesajelor de eroare 7DEHOXO/LVWDFRQVROLGDWăGHSUREOHPHXQLFHGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWH
17 Corectarea erorilor
Sarcina Total majore moderate minore
&RQVLVWHQĠăúLVWDQGDUGH
T1 15 3 7 5
18 &RQVLVWHQĠă
T2 5 2 2 1
19 ConfoUPLWDWHFXVWDQGDUGHúLUHJOHPHQWăUL
TOTAL 20 5 9 6
20 6HPQLILFDĠLHFRGXUL
Compatibilitate Din punctul de vedere al criteriilor ergonomice care nu au
21 Compatibilitate cu utilizatorul fost respectate, majoritatea problemelor de utilizabilitate
22 Compatibilitate cu sarcina de lucru DQWLFLSDWH GH HYDOXDUHD HXULVWLFă UHVSHFWLY 3 (65%), se
23 $VLVWHQĠăúLGRFXPHQWDĠLH GDWRUHD]ăJKLGăULLQHFRUHVSXQ]ăWRDUHDXWLOL]DWRUXOXL
24 3URLHFWDUHHVWHWLFăH[SHULHQĠăSOăFXWă
5DWD GH GHWHFĠLH LQGLYLGXDOă FDOFXODWă GXSă FRQVROLGDUHD
Setul de euristici a fost elaborat prin integrarea setului de FRODERUDWLYă D YDULDW vQWUH 20 úL 40% cu o medie de
FULWHULL HUJRQRPLFH DO OXL %DVWLHQ úL 6FDSLQ [3] úL 31.25%. (VWHRUDWămedie GHVWXOGHPLFăvQtruckWSHQWUX
euristicilor lui Jakob Nielsen [17] vQWUH FDUH H[LVWă R patru evaluatori, UDWD PHGLH GH GHWHFĠLH HVWH GH FHO SXĠLQ
suprapunere destul de mare. $YkQGvQYHGHUHFăFHOHGRXă 25%. Coeficientul de agreere mediu a fost 11.47%.
seturi originale de euristici au fost validate [19, 23], putem
6WXGLXGHFD]vQtestarea cu utilizatori
FRQVLGHUD Fă JUDGXO GH DFRSHULUH DO VHWXOXL LQWHJUDW GH
HXULVWLFL HVWH VXILFLHQW GH PDUH DWkW vQ FHHD FH SULYHúWH $YkQG vQ YHGHUH FDUDFWHUXO H[SHULPHQWDO DO VWXGLXOXL D
SXWHUHD H[SOLFDWLYă FkW úL vQ LGHQWLILFDUHD SUREOHPHORU IRVW HYDOXDW DFHODúL VLW ZHE SULQ WHVWDUHD FX XWLOL]DWRUL D
individuale de utilizabilitate. DFHORUDúLVDUFLQL
'HVFULHUHD GHWDOLDWă D SUREOHPHORU GH XWLOLzabilitate /DWHVWDUHDXSDUWLFLSDWXWLOL]DWRULGHVH[PDVFXOLQúL
XUPHD]ă IRUPDWXO SURSXV vQ >12], FX PHQĠLXQHD Fă GXSă de sex feminin, FX YkUVWH FXSULQVH vQWUH -58 de ani
GHVFULHUHDFDX]HORUVXQWLQFOXVHúLVXgestiile de remediere. 0  7RĠL XWLOL]DWRULL DX H[SHULHQĠă DQWHULRDUă vQ

26
 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

OXFUXOFXFDOFXODWRUXO7RWGDWăQLFLXQXWLOL]DWRUQXDIRVW La sarcina T2, din cele 5 probleme de utilizabilitate

familiar cu siturile evaluate. DQWLFLSDWH DX IRVW FRQILUPDWH  GH FăWUH XWLOL]DWRUL 8Q
$SOLFDĠLD D IRVW DFFHVDWă SH XQ VLVWHP GHVNWRS. QXPăU GH  SUREOHPH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH UHDOH QX DX IRVW
ÌQUHJLVWUDUHD SURWRFoalelor verbale s-a realizat cu LGHQWLILFDWHvQHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă,QGLFDWRULLGHYDOLGLWDWH
reportofon digital Philips LFH 7780. FRPSOHWLWXGLQHúLHILFLHQĠăDXXUPăWRDUHOHYDORUL9 0%,
& úL(* 
(YDOXDUHD D IRVW UHDOL]DWă vQ LDQXDULH  GH FăWUH R
HFKLSă IRUPDWă GLQ  HYDOXDWRri. Sarcinile au fost 'LIHUHQĠD vQWUH SUREOHPHOH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH DQWLFLSDWH úL
prezentaWHvQVFULVúLRUDOXWLOL]DWRULORUGHFăWUHIDFLOLWDWRUL FHOH UHDOH HVWH GHVWXO GH PDUH 3H GH R SDUWH QXPăUXO
pe parcursul sesiunilor de testare. Cei trei evaluatori au SUREOHPHORUGHXWLOL]DELOLWDWHRPLVHDUDWăOLPLWHOHHYDOXăULL
fost alternativ facilitatori pe parcursul sesiunilor de testare. HXULVWLFHúLXWLOLWDWHDWHVWăULLFXXWLOL]DWRULPe dHDOWăSDUWH
HYDOXDWRULL DX WHQGLQĠD GH D DQWLFLSD PXOWH SUREOHPH
ÌQ SULPD HWDSă SULPXO HYDOXDWRU D LGHQWLILFDW vQ WRWDO  PLQRUH  ORFDOH vQ WLPS FH vQ WHVWDUHD FX XWLOL]DWRUL VH
probleme de utilizabilitate dintre care 5 majore, al doilea LGHQWLILFă SUREOHPH PDMRUH  JOREDOH >4]. E[LVWă R
al 22 probleme dintre care 5 majore iar al treilea 20 FRPSOHPHQWDULWDWH vQWUH FHOH GRXă PHWRGH GH FDUH VH
probleme dintre care 6 majore. UHFRPDQGăVăVHĠLQăVHDPDPDLDOHVDWXQFLFkQGQXPăUXO
'XSă FRQVROLGDUHD SH VDUFLQă UH]XOWDWHOH REĠLQXWH GH de utilizatori este mic.
ILHFDUHHYDOXDWRUVXQWSUH]HQWDWHvQ7DEHOXO5. $WkW JUDGXO GH vQFUHGHUH FkW úL YDOLGLWDWHD PăVXUDWH GXSă
Tabelul 5. Probleme GXSăFRQVROLGDUHDLQGLYLGXDOă IRUPXOHOHPHQĠLRQDWHDQWHULRUWUHEXLHSULYLWHFXSUXGHQĠă
6DUFLQă Total Din care majore 1XPăUXO SUREOHPHORU DQWLFLSDWH D FHORU FRQILUPDWH úL D
Ev1 Ev 2 Ev 3 Ev 1 Ev 2 Ev 3 FHORU UHDOH GHSLQG DWkW GH QXPăUXO úL H[SHUWL]D
T1 6 4 5 1 2 1 HYDOXDWRULORUFkWúLGHQXPăUXOGHXWLOL]DWRUL
T2 4 5 3 1 2 2
Limite ale studiului
'XSă FRQVROLGDUHD FRODERUDWLYă DX UăPDV vQ WRWDO 
$FHVWVWXGLXUHSUH]LQWăSULPDH[SHULPHQWDUHVLVWHPDWLFăvQ
probleme de utilizabilitate, dintre care 2 majore, 8
5RPkQLD D XQHL PHWRGRORJLL GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH Ìn mod
PRGHUDWHúLXQDPLQRUă /LVWDHVWHSUH]HQWDWăvQ7DEHOXO
LQHUHQW H[LVWă R VHULH GH OLPLWăUL OHJDWH GH UHVXUVHle
Tabelul 6 /LVWDFRQVROLGDWăGHSUREOHPHXQice de utilizabilitate disponibile, caracterul experimental (de laborator),
Sarcina Total majore moderate minore QRXWDWHDDFWLYLWăĠLLúLH[SHUWL]DvQHYDOXDUH
T1 6 1 4 1
2OLPLWăDVWXGLXOXL HVWHQXPăUXOUHGXVGHXWLOL]DWRULFDUH
T2 5 1 4 0
TOTAL 11 2 8 1
DXWHVWDWQXPDLGRXăVDUFLQLúLQXPăUXOPLFGHHYDOXDWRUL
care au condus la identificarea unXL QXPăU PLF GH
'RXă GLQWUH SUREOHPHOH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH DX IRVW probleme de utilizabilitate.
LGHQWLILFDWHGHXWLOL]DWRULDOWHGRXăGHFăWUHXWLOL]DWRUL
iar restul de 7 probleme de utilizabilitaWH GH FăWUH XQ 2DOWăOLPLWăHVWHOLSVDGHH[SHULHQĠăDHYDOXDWRULORUGLQWUH
singur utilizator. Un utilizator a identificat 6 probleme FDUH QXPDL XQXO D PDL HIHFWXDW HYDOXDUH HXULVWLFă vQWU-un
(54.54%), alt utilizator a identificat 5 probleme (45.45%), SURLHFW DQWHULRU 3H GH DOWă SDUWH WRĠL WUHL DX HYDOXDW
DOĠLGRLXWLOL]DWRULDXLGHQWLILFDWFDWHSUREOHPH
VLXOWLPXO XWLOL]DWRUDLGHQWLILFDWQXPDLGRXăSUREOHPHGH
utilizabilitate (18.18%)
2 DQDOL]ă D FULWHULLORU HUJRQRPLFH QHUHVSHFWDWH DUDWă Fă
FHOH PDL PXOWH SUREOHPH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH VH GDWRUHD]ă
SHQWUX SULPD GDWă SH ED]D DQDOLzei protocoalelor verbale.
$úD FXP V-D PHQĠLRQDW DQWHULRU FX QXPDL WUHL HYDOXDWRUL
vQFHSăWRUL VH SRW GHWHFWD FFD  GLQ SUREOHPHOH GH
XWLOL]DELOLWDWHH[LVWHQWHvQWU-RLQWHUIDĠă
CONCLUZII
efortului GH RSHUDUH  úL OLSVHL GH JKLGDUH
(27.27%).
5DWD GH GHWHFĠLH LQGLYLGXDOă D IRVW ULGLFDWă YDULLQG vQWUH
 úL  5DWD GH GHWHFĠLH PHGLH D IRVW GH
72.73%. Coeficientul de agreere mediu a fost de 67.07%.
$WkW UDWD PHGLH GH GHWHFĠLH FkW úL FRHILFLHQWXO GH DJUHHUH
DX YDORUL IRDUWH ULGLFDWH PDL DOHV GDFă OH FRPSDUăP FX
UH]XOWDWHOH HYDOXăULL HXULVWLFH O H[SOLFDĠLH HVWH IDSWXO Fă
&RQFHSĠLD GH LQWHJUDUH FDUH VWă OD ED]D PHWRGRORJLHL
utilizate aUHODED]ă XWLOL]DUHDDGRXăWLSXULGH PHWRGH GH
HYDOXDUHIRUPDWLYăúLDUHPXOWLSOHDYDQWDMHvQWUHFDUHFHOH
mai importante sunt:
x Complementaritatea metodelor, respectiv combinarea
XQHLPHWRGHED]DWHSHLQVSHFĠLHHYDOXDUHGHWLS
expert) cu testarea cu utLOL]DWRULHYDOXDUHFHQWUDWăSH
utilizator).
s-DX WHVWDW QXPDL GRXă VDUFLQL GHVWXO GH VLPSOH LDU x &UHúWHUHDJUDGXOXLGHvQFUHGHUHúLDYDOLGLWăĠLL
QXPăUXOGHutilizDWRULDIRVWPLFHVWHQXPăUXOPLQLPGH rezultatelor, prin confirmarea problemelor de
utilizDWRULIDSWFDUHDFRQGXVODLGHQWLILFDUHDXQXLQXPăU XWLOL]DELOLWDWHDQWLFLSDWHGHFăWUHWHVWDUHDFXXWLOL]DWRUL
redus de probleme de utilizabilitate. úLSULQXWLOL]DUHDDFHORUDúLPăVXULFDQWLWDWLYHúL
calitDWLYHvQDPEHOHPHWRGH
Analiza comparatLYăDUH]XOWDWHORU
x &UHúWHUHDHILFLHQĠHLDFWLYLWăĠLLGHUHPHGLHUHD
La sarcina T1, din cele 15 probleme de utilizabilitate problemelor de utilizabilitate, prin utilizarea unei
DQWLFLSDWH DX IRVW FRQILUPDWH  GH FăWUH XWLOL]DWRUL 8Q PHWRGHPDLSXĠLQFRVWLVLWRDUHHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFăFD
QXPăU GH  SUREOHPH GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH UHDOH QX DX IRVW HYDOXDUHSUHOLPLQDUăvQVFRSXOHOLPLQăULLHURULORUGH
LGHQWLILFDWHvQHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă programare).

27
 C. Pribeanu, A-E. Reveiu (eds.), RoCHI 2010

$WkWHYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFăFkWúLWHVWDUHDFXXWLOL]DWRULSURGXF International Journal of Human-Computer

descrieri ale problemelor de utilizabilitate pe baza unui Interaction 13, 373±410
format unic. Din acest motiv, efortul de descriere este
UHGXV vQWUXFkW R PDUH SDUWH GLQ SUREOHPH UHVSHFWLY FHOH
DQWLFLSDWH úL FRQILUPDWH VXQW GHVFULVH vQ HYDOXDUHD
HXULVWLFă
$QDOL]D UH]XOWDWHORU ILHFăUHL PHWRGH DUH úL VFRSXO GH D
IXUQL]D XQ IHHGEDFN XWLO DVXSUD SHUIRUPDQĠHORU ILHFăUXL
HYDOXDWRU UDSRUWDW OD SHUIRUPDQĠHOH HFKLSHL GH HYDOXDUH
$QDOL]D FRPSDUDWLYă D UH]XOWDWHORU REĠLQXWH GH FHOH GRXă
10. +HUW]XP0-DFREVHQ1(Ä7KHHYDOXDWRU
effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation
PHWKRGV´International Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction 13, 421-443.
11. Hornbaek , K & Frokjaer, E. (2008). Comparison of
techniques for matching of usability problem
descriptions. Interacting with Computers 20, 505-514.
12. Hvannberg, E.T. and Law, E.L.-C., Larusdotir, M.C.
PHWRGH SHUPLWH FDOFXODUHD LQGLFDWRULORU GH HILFDFLWDWH úL
HILFLHQĠăDHYDOXăULLHXULVWLFHúLRIHUăRFRQILUPDUHSULYLQG
YDOLGLWDWHD SUREOHPHORU GH XWLOL]DELOLWDWH LGHQWLILFDWH vQ
HYDOXDUHDHXULVWLFă
6H LQWHQĠLRQHD]ă HIHFWXDUHD XQXL QRX VWXGLX GH FD] vQ
DSOLFDUHDPHWRGRORJLHLLQWHJUDWHFXXQQXPăUPDLPDUHGH
utilizatori.
Confirmare
$FHDVWăOXFUDUH a fost ILQDQĠDWă din proiectul de cercetare
PS MCSI 49/2008.
5()(5,1ğ(
Ä+HXULVWLF(YDOXDWLRQ&RPSDULQJZD\VRI
finding an reporting usability problems, Interacting
with Computers 19, 255-240.
13. Law, E. Hvannberg, E.T. (2008): Consolidating
usability problems with novice evaluators.
Proceedings of NordiCHI 2008. ACM Press, 495-
498.
14. Leulier, C., Bastien, C., Scapin, D. (1998) Commerce
& Interactions. INRIA Report.
15. Molich, R., and Nielsen, J. (1990). Improving a
human-computer dialogue, Communications of the
ACM 33(3), 338-348.
16. Molich, R., Jeffries, R., Dumas, J. (2007) Making
1. $QGUHL'00XUHúDQ$'$WULEXWH usability recommendations usable. Journal of
KHGRQLFHúLSUDJPDWLFHvQGHWHUPLQDUHD H[SHULHQĠHL Usability Studies, 2(1), 162-179.
utilizDWRUXOXLGHWHOHIRQLHPRELOăBuraga, S.C. & 17. Nielsen, J. (1992). Finding usability problems through
-XYLQă,(G,QWHUDFĠLXQH2P-Calculator 2008. heuristic evaluation. P. Bauersfeld, J. Bennett & G.
MatrixROM, 133-138. Lynch (Eds.), 3URFHHGLQJVRI&+,¶, ACM Press..
2. Bach, C. & Scapin, D.L., 2003. Adaptation of 18. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Academic
Ergonomic Criteria to Human-Virtual Environments Press, New York.
Interactions. Proceedings oI,QWHUDFW¶. IOS Press,
880-883.
3. Bastien, C. & Scapin, D.L. (1993) Evaluating a User
Interface with Ergonomic Criteria. INRIA Report,
Roquencourt.
4. Cockton, G., Woolrych, A. (2001). Understanding
inspection methods: lessons from an assessment of
heuristic evaluation. Blandford, A., Vanderdonckt, J.,
Gray, P.D. (Eds.), Proceedings of People and
Computers XV. Springer-Verlag, 171±182
5. Connell, I.W., Hammond, N.V., 1999. Comparing
usability evaluation principles with heuristics. In:
Sasse, A., Johnson C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th
IFIP international conference on Human-computer
Interaction, INTERACT'99, IOS Press, Edinburgh.
6. Dumas, J., Redish, J. A practical guide to usability
testing. Intellect, 1999.
19. 1LHOVHQ-³Enhancing the explanatory power
of usability heuristics´3URFHHGLQJVRI&+,¶, ACM
Press, 152-158.
20. Nielsen, J. (1997). Usability Testing. Handbook of
Human Factors and Ergonomics. G. Salvendy, John
Wiley and Sons, 1543-1568.
21. Nielsen, J. (2000) Why You Only Need to Test with 5
Users. Alertbox, March 19, 2000.
22. Pribeanu, C., Iordache, D.D., Balog, A. (2008)
(YDOXDUHDXWLOL]DELOLWăĠLLXQXLVFHQDULXGHvQYăĠDUHD
ELRORJLHLLPSOHPHQWDWSHRSODWIRUPDăGHUHDOLWDWH
vPERJăĠLWă. 5HYLVWD5RPkQăGH,QWHUDFĠLXQH2P-
Calculator, 1(1), 39-56.
23. Scapin, D. & Bastien, C. (1997) Ergonomic criteria
for evaluating the ergonomic quality of interactive
systems. Behaviour & Information Technology,
16(4/5), 220-231.
7. Gerhardt-Powals, J., 1996. Cognitive engineering 24. Theofanos, M. & Quesenbery, W. ³Towards
principles for enhancing human-computer the Design of Effective Formative Test Reports´.
performance. International Journal of Human- Journal of Usability Studies, Issue 1, Vol.1, 27-45
Computer Interaction 8, 189±211. 25. *** UPA 2007 Survey. Usability Professionals
8. *XUDQ$0&RMRFDU*6$ERUGăULvQ Association.
HYDOXDWUHDDXWRPDWăDXWLOizDELOLWăĠLL6WXGLX 26. *** UPA 2009 Survey. Usability Professionals
comparativ. 5HYLVWD5RPkQăGH,QWHUDFĠLXQH2P- Association.
Calculator, 1(1), 73-84.
9. Hartson, H.R., Andre, T.S., Williges, R.C., (2001).
Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods.

28

View publication stats