Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 186

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Criteria For Evaluating Usability Evaluation Methods

Hartson, H. Rex, Andre, Terence S., Williges, Robert C.·2003·International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract

The current variety of alternative approaches to usability evaluation methods (UEMs) designed to assess and improve usability in software systems is offset by a general lack of understanding of the capabilities and limitations of each. Practitioners need to know which methods are more effective and in what ways and for what purposes. However, UEMs cannot be evaluated and compared reliably because of the lack of standard criteria for comparison. In this article, we present a practical discussion of factors, comparison criteria, and UEM performance measures useful in studies comparing UEMs. In demonstrating the importance of developing appropriate UEM evaluation criteria, we offer operational definitions and possible measures of UEM performance. We highlight specific challenges that researchers and practitioners face in comparing UEMs and provide a point of departure for further discussion and refinement of the principles and techniques used to approach UEM evaluation and comparison.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327590ijhc1501_13

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 186

Metadata

Authors
Hartson, H. R., Andre, T. S., & Williges, R. C.
Venue
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2003-02
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
145-181
ISSN
  • 1044-7318 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7590
OpenAlex
W4243671897
Cited by
186
References
3
FWCI
2.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Criteria For Evaluating Usability Evaluation Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327590ijhc1501_13
The paper
Hartson, H. R., Andre, T. S., & Williges, R. C. (2003). Criteria For Evaluating Usability Evaluation Methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327590ijhc1501_13

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.