Evaluating user interface usability for task completion

According to one embodiment of the present invention, a system for tracking and presenting states of a user interface includes at least one processor. The at least one processor may be configured to track the visibility and usage of each of a plurality of areas of a user interface. The processor may be further configured to determine the navigation sequence through the plurality of areas of the user interface when utilized to complete a task. The processor may be configured to graphically present the visibility, usage, and determined navigation sequences on a display that includes a layout of the user interface, where the graphical presentation of the visibility, usage, and determined navigation sequences may be displayed within their corresponding areas of the layout of the user interface.

BACKGROUND

Present invention embodiments relate to evaluating a user interface's usability for task completion, and more specifically, to tracking users' frequency of use, residency, and click flow path within a user interface for analyzing the usability of the user interface for completing designated tasks.

User interfaces present information to users via various areas, panes, or windows within the user interface. Certain areas of a user interface are always displayed, while other areas are only displayed when prompted or activated by a user utilizing the user interface. Different areas often present and display different information. User interfaces may also display various buttons, switches, or icons that are selectable by users utilizing the user interface. The combination of the buttons with the areas of the user interface enables a user to perform and complete tasks with the user interface.

However, the design of a user interface may not be optimized for users to efficiently complete the intended tasks for which the user interface was originally designed. Some user interfaces may present a large portion of the display with an area that is rarely utilized or does not provide useful information. Other user interfaces may require several steps to be performed by a user to display areas or buttons that are useful for completing a task, where these areas or buttons should be displayed more easily or more frequently. User interfaces may be optimized so that tasks may be completed by users in a more time efficient and effective manner.

SUMMARY

According to one embodiment of the present invention, a system for tracking and presenting states of a user interface includes at least one processor. The at least one processor may be configured to track the visibility and usage of each of a plurality of areas of a user interface. The processor may also be configured to determine one or more navigation sequences through the plurality of areas based on usage of the user interface, where the navigation sequences are performed to complete a task with the user interface. Finally, the processor may be configured to graphically present the visibility, usage, and determined navigation sequences on a display that includes a layout of the user interface, where the graphical presentation of the visibility, usage, and determined navigation sequences may be displayed within the corresponding areas of the layout of the user interface.

Furthermore, the processor of the system may determine the visibility as a first percentage of time each corresponding area is visible, and determine the usage as a second percentage of time each corresponding area is in use. The processor may also determine the visibility as an amount of time each corresponding area is visible, and determine the usages as an amount of time each corresponding area is in use. The processor may then display graphical objects that indicate the amount of time for the visibility of each corresponding area and the amount of time for the usage of each corresponding area. In addition, the processor may display connections between the graphical objects to form a connected graph of the plurality of areas, where the connections between the graphical objects may indicate the navigation sequence of the user interface.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention embodiments pertain to a system and method for tracking and presenting states of a user interface to evaluate the user interface for its efficiency in completing a task. The system may track the visibility and usage of each of a plurality of areas or panels during the time it takes for a test user to complete a designated task with the user interface. The system may determine the visibility of each of the areas of the user interface as a first percentage of time each of the areas is visible during the time it takes a test user to complete the designated task using the user interface. Moreover, the system may also determine the usage of each of the areas of the user interface as second percentage of time each area is used during the time it takes for a test user to complete the designated task using the user interface. The system may further determine the navigation sequences a test user had taken within the user interface to complete the designated task with a user interface. The system may further generate a report of the efficiency and usefulness of the user interface, where the report may include a graphical presentation of the visibility of each of the areas, the usage of each of the areas, and the navigation sequence displayed over the layout of the user interface.

The designers, developers, and/or programmers of a user interface may not be the end user of the user interface. Thus, the designer/developer/programmer of the user interface may understand the tasks that may need to be completed with the user interface, but may not have a full understanding of the manner in which these tasks will be completed, or the steps taken by an end user to complete the task with the designed user interface. The present invention provides a system that can be utilized during, and after, the design/development of a user interface. The present invention embodiment may monitor a user interface while a test user utilizes the user interface to complete a designated task, where the present invention embodiment is configured to track the visibility and usage of each of the areas of the user interface during the completion of the task, as well as the navigation sequence the test user establishes to complete the task. The present invention embodiment may be used to monitor any number of test users to complete the same designated task, where the results from each test user's session are tracked and recorded. The present invention embodiment may then collect and compile all of the evaluations from each of the test users monitored, where the compiled data is then analyzed to determine any discrepancies between the amount of time each area of the user interface was visible and the amount of time each area of the user interface was actively used during the completion of the assigned task.

The present invention embodiments may generate reports that indicate the efficiency and usefulness of the user interface for completing the designated task. The generated reports may display the amount of time taken to complete the designated task, the navigation sequence taken by users to complete the designated task, as well as any large discrepancies between the visibility and usage of each of the areas of the user interface. The generated report may be used by the designers/developers/programmers of the user interface to modify the setup, layout, and operation of the user interface. More specifically, designers/developers/programmers may modify the user interface to eliminate or reduce the amount of discrepancies that were identified by the present invention embodiment. The designers/developers/programmers may also utilize the generated reports to streamline the navigation sequences taken by users to complete the designated task.

An example environment for use with present invention embodiments is illustrated inFIG. 1. Specifically, the environment includes one or more server systems100, and one or more client or end-user systems140,140′. Server systems100and client systems140,140′ may be remote from each other and communicate over a network120. The network120may be implemented by any number of any suitable communications media (e.g., wide area network (WAN), local area network (LAN), Internet, Intranet, etc.). Alternatively, server systems100and client systems140,140′ may be local to each other, and communicate via any appropriate local communication medium (e.g., local area network (LAN), hardwire, wireless link. Intranet, etc.).

Server systems100and client systems140,140′ may be implemented by any conventional or other computer systems preferably equipped with a display or monitor, a base (e.g., including at least one processor20, one or more memories30and/or internal or external network interfaces or communications devices10(e.g., modem, network cards, etc.)), optional input devices (e.g., a keyboard, mouse or other input device), and any commercially available and custom software (e.g., server/communications software, user interface evaluation module, evaluation collection module, report generation module, browser/interface software, etc.).

Client systems140,140′ enable users to establish communication links via communication channels (e.g., email, SMS/text messaging, tweeting, instant messaging, audio calls, video chats, etc.) with other client systems140,140′ and/or the server system100. The client systems140,140′ may include a user interface evaluation module142,142′ that tracks and monitors a user interface of the client systems140,140′ and a report generation module144,144′ that generates a report of the evaluation of a user interface. When the user interface module142,142′ is used to evaluate a user interface of the client systems140,140′, the user interface evaluation module142,142′ tracks and monitors a test user's interaction and use of a user interface to complete a designated task. The user interface evaluation module142,142′ tracks a test user's click path and click flow, and monitors the frequency of each area of the user interface is used and the time that each area of the user interface is being displayed. Moreover, the user interface evaluation module142,142′ may further monitor the navigation sequence of a test user utilizing the user interface to complete a designated task. The server system100may include an evaluation collection module102to collect the user interface evaluations from a plurality of client systems140,140′.

Modules102,142,142′,144,144′ may include one or more modules or units to perform the various functions of present invention embodiments described below. The various modules (e.g., user interface evaluation module, report generation module, and evaluation collection module, etc.) may be implemented by any combination of any quantity of software and/or hardware modules or units, and may reside within memory30of the server100and/or client systems140,140′ for execution by processor20.

In the environment illustrated inFIG. 1, the user interface evaluation module142,142′ of the client systems140,140′ monitors user interfaces that are installed on the client system140,140′ on which the user interface evaluation module142,142′ is also installed. The user interface evaluation module monitors and tracks a user interface as it is used by a test user to complete a designated task. Once a user interface has been monitored and evaluated for the completion of a designated task, each of the client systems140,140′ send to the server system100the evaluation of the user interface. The evaluation collection module102of the server system100compiles all of the user interface evaluations from each of the client systems140,140′. The server system100may then send the compiled evaluations of the completion of a designated task with the user interface to the first client system140, or to all of the client systems140,140′. The report generation module144,144′ then uses the compiled user interface evaluations to create or generate a report for the completion of the designated task using the user interface installed on the client systems140,140′. The generated reports may display the effectiveness or efficiency of the user interface in completing the designated task. The test users of the client systems140,140′ can analyze the generated reports to determine if or where the user interface may need to be altered or changed to be more effective and/or efficient in performing the designated task.

A second example environment for use with present invention embodiments is illustrated inFIG. 2. Similarly to the first example illustrated inFIG. 1, the environment includes two or more client or end-user systems140,140′,140″,140′″, but does not include the server system100. Each of the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″ communicate with one another via a network120. Each one of the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″ includes a user interface evaluation module142,142′,142″,142′″. As explained previously, the user interface evaluation module142,142′,142″,142′″ of a client system140,140′,140″,140′″ monitors user interfaces that are installed on the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″ on which the user interface evaluation module142,142′,142″,142′″ is also installed. More specifically, the user interface evaluation modules142,142′,142″,142′″ monitor the user interfaces installed on the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″ as the user interfaces are utilized by test users of the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″ to complete a designated task. The first client system140, however, also includes a report generation module144and an evaluation collection module146. As previously explained, the evaluation collection module146of the first client system140compiles all of the user interface evaluations from each of the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″. The report generation module144then uses the compiled user interface evaluations to create or generate a report for the completion of the designated task using the user interface installed on the client systems140,140′,140″,140′″. The generated reports may display the effectiveness, efficiency, and/or usability of the user interface in completing a designated task. The designers of the user interface on the client systems140,140′ can analyze the generated reports to determine if or where a user interface may need to be altered or changed to be more effective and/or efficient in performing the designated task.

FIG. 3illustrates an example of a heuristic evaluation diagram300for an example user interface310. As illustrated inFIG. 3, the user interface310contains a plurality of areas, panels, or frames,312(1)-312(8), where each area312(1)-312(8) may be different from another area312(1)-312(8) in size, shape, and content. Each of the areas312(1)-312(8) of the user interface310may have a title, or name,314(1)-314(8) for what each area312(1)-312(8) represents in the user interface310. WhileFIG. 3illustrates a user interface310, the user interface310illustrated is merely an example of a user interface, where another user interface may include more or less areas, and the areas may be oriented in different positions and may be of different sizes. As illustrated inFIG. 3, the top of the user interface310includes an area312(1) spanning the width of the user interface310, but being relatively short in height. The first area312(1) may be labeled “Banner”314(1), which may contain a logo, global navigation controls, and/or tools for operating the user interface310. Directly below the first area312(1) is a second area312(2) that may be labeled “Title Bar”314(2). The second area312(2) is substantially similar in size and shape to the first area312(1), and may be disposed directly below the first area312(1). The second area312(2) may contain the name of the user interface310.

Further illustrated inFIG. 3are third, fourth, and fifth areas312(3)-312(5). The third area312(3) may be substantially rectangular in shape and may be disposed along the left side of the user interface310, where the third area312(3) may span the length of the user interface310from the bottom of the second area312(2) to the bottom of the user interface310. The third area312(3) may be labeled “Nav Icons” or “Navigation Icons”314(3), and may contain a series of navigation icons for operating the user interface310. The fourth area312(4) may be disposed directly to the right of the third area312(3). As illustrated inFIG. 3, the fourth area312(4) is defined by a dotted or dashed lines, which represents that that fourth area312(4) may be a sub area, or sub panel, of another area. The dotted or dashed lines may further indicate that the fourth area312(4) may not be displayed all of the time. As illustrated inFIG. 3, the fourth area312(4) is a sub area of the third area312(3), where the fourth area312(4) is labeled “Auto-exp select panel”314(4). This labeling may be an abbreviation for automatic expanding selection panel, which may signify that the fourth area312(4) is an area that automatically expands from the third area312(3) when an item is selected or hovered over within the third area312(3). Moreover, the fifth area312(5) is also defined by a dotted or dashed line, which represents that that fifth area312(5) is a sub area of the fourth area312(4). The fifth area312(5), as illustrated, may be disposed within, and on the right side of, the fourth area312(4). Furthermore, the fifth area312(5) may be labeled “Auto-exp Sub select panel”314(5), which may be an abbreviation for automatic expanding sub-selection panel. Thus, the fifth area312(5) may be an area that automatically expands from the fourth area312(4) when an item is selected or hovered over within the fourth area312(4).

Continuing withFIG. 3, on the right side of the user interface310is the sixth, seventh, and eighth areas312(6)-312(8) of the user interface310. Disposed within the bottom right corner of the user interface310may be the sixth area312(6), while disposed within the top right corner of the user interface310, directly below the second area312(2), may be the eighth area312(8). Furthermore, disposed between the sixth area312(6) and the eighth area312(8) may be the seventh area312(7). As illustrated in the example of the user interface310ofFIG. 3, the sixth area312(6) and the eighth area312(8) are of nearly equivalent size, while the seventh area312(7) is larger than both the sixth and eighth areas312(6),312(8). Furthermore, both the sixth and the eighth areas312(6),312(8) are defined by dotted or dashed lines, which may represent that that sixth and eighth areas312(6),312(8) are not visible at all times that the user interface310is running. The sixth area312(6) may be labeled “Bottom manual-expand panel”314(6) which may be an abbreviation for bottom manually expanding panel. Similarly, the eighth area312(8) may be labeled “Top manual-expand panel”314(8), which may be an abbreviation for top manually expanding panel. Thus, the sixth and eighth areas312(6),312(8) are areas that must be manually expanded to be visible within the user interface310. Moreover, the seventh area312(7) is defined by a solid line, meaning that the seventh area312(7) may be visible at all times, and is not an area that is an expansion of another area. The seventh area312(7) may be labeled “Map panel”312(7), and may contain a map displayed within the area312(7).

As further illustrated inFIG. 3, each area312(1)-312(8) contains a first percentage316(1)-316(8) and a second percentage318(1)-318(8). The first percentage316(1)-316(8) may represent the percentage that the respective specific area312(1)-312(8) was used during the time period the user interface310was utilized to perform a designated task. The second percentage318(1)-318(8) may represent the percentage of time that the respective specific area312(1)-312(8) was visible within the user interface310during the time span the user interface310was utilized to perform a designated task. Moreover,FIG. 3further includes graphical representations of the first percentage316(1)-316(8) and the second percentage318(1)-318(8) for each of the areas312(1)-312(8). The first percentage316(1)-316(8) for each area312(1)-312(8) may be represented by a circle320(1)-320(8), where the size of the circle320(1)-320(8) for each area312(1)-312(8) is relative to the value of the first percentage316(1)-316(8). The second percentage318(1)-318(8) may be represented by a diamond or square322(1)-322(8), where the size of the diamond or square322(1)-322(8) for each area312(1)-312(8) is relative to the value of the second percentage318(1)-318(8). The circle320(1)-320(8) for each area312(1)-312(8) may be disposed within the diamond322(1)-322(8) for each area312(1)-312(8), so that discrepancies between the size of the circle320(1)-320(8) and the size of the diamond322(1)-322(8) may be easily identified. Discrepancies between the size of the circle320(1)-320(8) and the size of the diamond322(1)-322(8) further represent discrepancies between amount of use an area312(1)-312(8) received and the amount of time the area312(1)-312(8) was visible when the user interface310was used to complete a designated task.

Thus, as illustrated inFIG. 3, large discrepancies exist in four areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7). The first and second areas312(1),312(2) have large discrepancies between their circle320(1),320(2) and their diamonds322(1),322(2) because, during the completion of the designated task, the first and second areas312(1),312(2) are visible 100% of the time, as indicated by their second percentages318(1),318(2), but the first area312(1) is used less than 5% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(1), and the second area312(2) is used approximately 5% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(2). Moreover, the third area312(3) has large discrepancies between its circle320(3) and its diamond322(3) because the third area312(3) is visible 100% of the time, as indicated by its second percentages318(3), but is used approximately 10% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(3), during the completion of the designated task. Finally, the seventh area312(7) has large discrepancies between its circle320(7) and its diamond322(7) because the seventh area312(7) was visible 100% of the time, as indicated by its second percentage318(7), but was used less than 5% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(7), during the completion of the designated task.

Further illustrated inFIG. 3, the circles320(4),320(5),320(6),320(8) of the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth areas312(4),312(5),312(6),312(8) are substantially equal in size with the respective diamonds322(4),322(5),322(6),322(8). Thus, the fourth area312(4) has a circle320(4) and a diamond322(4) of substantially equal size because the fourth area312(4) was visible 40% of the time, as indicated by its second percentage318(4), and was used 40% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(4), during the completion of the designated task. The fifth and eighth areas312(5),312(8) have circles320(5),312(8) and diamonds322(5),322(8) of substantially equal size because the fifth and eighth areas312(5),312(8) were visible 20% of the time, as indicated by their second percentages318(5),318(8), and were used 20% of the time, as indicated by their first percentages316(5),316(8), during the completion of the designated task. The sixth area312(6) has a circle320(6) and a diamond322(6) of substantially equal size because the sixth area312(6) was visible 75% of the time, as indicated by its second percentage318(6), and was used 75% of the time, as indicated by its first percentage316(4), during the completion of the designated task.

The circles320(4),320(5),320(6),320(8) of the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth areas312(4),312(5),312(6),312(8) are significantly larger than the circles320(1),320(2),320(3),320(7) of the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7) because the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth areas312(4),312(5),312(6),312(8) were all used more during the completion of the designated task than the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7). As illustrated inFIG. 3, the sixth area312(6) contains the largest circle320(6) because the sixth area312(6) was used the most (75%) during the completion of the designated task. Conversely, the first and seventh areas312(1),312(7) contain the smallest circles320(1),320(7) because the first and seventh areas312(1),312(7) were used the least (<5%) during the completion of the designated task. Furthermore, the diamonds322(4),322(5),322(6),322(8) of the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth areas312(4),312(5),312(6),312(8) are smaller in size than the diamonds322(1),322(2),322(3),322(7) of the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7) because the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth areas312(4),312(5),312(6),312(8) are visible for a smaller amount of time than the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7) during the completion of the designated task. As further illustrated inFIG. 3, the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7) contain the largest diamonds322(1),322(2),322(3),322(7) because the first, second, third, and seventh areas312(1),312(2),312(3),312(7) were visible for the most amount of time (100%) of the time during the completion of the designated task. Conversely, the fifth and eighth areas312(5),312(8) contain the smallest diamonds322(5),322(8) because the fifth and eighth areas312(5),312(8) were visible for the least amount of time (20%) during the completion of the designated task.

Further illustrated inFIG. 3is a navigation sequence path designated by arrows324. As indicated by the set of arrows324, a test user using the user interface310to complete a designated task started with the first and second areas312(1),312(2), and moved to the third area312(3). From the third area312(3), the user using the user interface310moved on to the fourth area312(4) and then to the fifth area312(5). The test user using the user interface310to complete the designated task moved from the fifth area312(5) to the sixth area312(6) and then to the eighth area312(8). The test user skipped over and didn't use the seventh area312(7). The arrows324connect the circles320(1)-320(8) and the diamonds322(1)-322(8) of the areas312(1)-312(8) to designate the navigation sequence of the test user.

Additionally,FIG. 3illustrates that the heuristic evaluation diagram300includes text sections330,332,334,336that may define groups of the areas312(1)-312(8) by their performance or function in completing the designated task. As illustrated, the third, fourth, and fifth areas312(3),312(4),312(5) are labeled with the text “select/define”330because the third, fourth, and fifth areas312(3),312(4),312(5) may present items or icons in their respective areas that are selectable. The sixth area312(6) may be labeled with the text “run/view”332because the sixth area312(6) may contain items, icons, or prompts for the user of the user interface310to run a scenario or another program and may present information that is to be viewed by the user. The seventh area312(7) may be labeled with the text “view”334because the seventh area312(7) may contain or present information that is to be viewed by the user. Finally, the eighth area312(7) may be labeled with the text “report/export”336because the eighth area312(8) may contain items, icons, or prompts for the user of the user interface310present a report or export the information to another program or location. Each text section330,332,334,336contains a different level of shading, which may indicate the amount of time a user spent in those areas312(1)-312(8) while completing the designated task. Thus, the text section332that is associated with the sixth area312(6) may be darker than the text section334that is associated with the seventh area312(7) because, as previously indicated for the illustrated example, the sixth area312(6) was the most used area of the user interface310and the seventh area312(7) was the least used area of the user interface310. In other embodiments, the text sections330,332,334,336may contain different colors of shading rather than the level of darkness of shading to further indicate usage.

Turning toFIG. 4, illustrated is a divergent evaluation diagram400. The divergent evaluation diagram400may include a display area410that may contain a view of the heuristic evaluation diagram300with the user interface310and a value420of the percentage of selections within the user interface310that did not contribute to the completion of the designated task. As illustrated inFIG. 4, the value420is disposed on the left side of the divergent evaluation diagram400, while the heuristic evaluation diagram300is disposed on the right side of the divergent evaluation diagram400. Moreover, the divergent evaluation diagram400may further include a plurality of rings430disposed in various locations on the user interface310. The plurality of rings430may all be of equivalent size. Moreover, the plurality of rings430may be of a different color or shading than the circles320(1)-320(8) of the areas312(1)-312(8) of the user interface310. The plurality of rings430represent the various locations where users clicked, selected, or hovered over the user interface310, where the clicks or selections by the users did not contribute to the completion of the designated task. In the example illustrated inFIG. 4, there were twelve divergent selections430by users when completing the designated task with the user interface310. Furthermore, as indicated by the value420on the left side of the divergent evaluation diagram400, the twelve divergent selections430are 20% of the total number of selections in the user interface310.

Turning toFIG. 5, illustrated is an elapsed time evaluation diagram500. The elapsed time evaluation diagram500may include a display area510that may contain a value520of the average time elapsed for the completion of the designated task with the user interface310and a graphical chart530of the time taken by each of the test users to complete the designated task. As illustrated inFIG. 5, the value520is disposed on the left side of the elapsed time evaluation diagram500, while the graphical chart530is disposed on the right side of the elapsed time evaluation diagram400. In the example illustrated inFIG. 5, the value520illustrates that the average time taken to complete the designated task with the user interface was 9 minutes and that the projected average time was 12 minutes. Thus, the test users completed the designated task with the user interface310under the projected time. Moreover, while the graphical chart530is illustrated as a bar graph, the graphical chart530could be any type of chart, such as a pie chart, line graph, scatter plot, etc., to convey the number of test users that completed the designated task with the user interface310and the amount of time taken by each test user to complete the designated task with the user interface310. The graphical chart530illustrated inFIG. 5displays five test users532,534,536,538,540. As illustrated, the first test user532completed the designated task in 7 minutes, and the second user534completed the designated task in 11 minutes. Additionally, the third user536completed the designated task in 9 minutes, while the fourth user538completed the designated task in 8 minutes. The fifth user540completed the designated task in 10 minutes. When each of these times from each of the test users532,534,536,538,540are averaged, the average time equals 9 minutes, as displayed by the value520in the elapsed time evaluation diagram500.

Turning toFIG. 6, illustrated is an example of a heuristic evaluation report600. The example of the heuristic evaluation report600includes the heuristic evaluation diagram300with the example of the user interface310, the divergent evaluations diagram400, and the elapsed time evaluation diagram500. Proximate to the top of the heuristic evaluation report600is a designated task listing610that displays the designated task completed with the user interface310. In the example illustrated inFIG. 6, the designated task listing610states that the designated task was to “open a district, create and save a report of future stoplight failures,” Disposed directly below the designated task listing610is the number of test users listing620that states that number of test users that completed the designated task during the evaluation period. As illustrated, five (5) test users completed the designated task during the evaluation period. Further illustrated inFIG. 6, disposed below the number of test users listing620on the left side of the heuristic evaluation report600is a potential problems listing630and a conforming areas listing640. As illustrated, the heuristic evaluation report600is indicating that the user interface310may contain 2 potential problems and may have 4 areas of the user interface310that conform to necessary standards. Disposed to the right of the potential problems listing630and the conforming areas listing640is the heuristic evaluation diagram300with a sample of the user interface310.

FIG. 6further illustrates that the heuristic evaluation report600displays the divergent evaluation diagram400and the elapsed time evaluation diagram500below the potential problems listing630, the conforming areas listing640, and the heuristic evaluation diagram300. The divergent evaluation diagram400is disposed on the left side of the heuristic evaluation report600and the elapsed time evaluation diagram500is disposed on the right side of the heuristic evaluation report600. Disposed below the divergent evaluation diagram400and the elapsed time evaluation diagram500is a series of text that is broken down into five categories650,660,670,680,690. The first text category, or the “Framework” category,650includes a first listing652and a second listing656. The first listing652represents the first area312(1) of the user interface310entitled “Banner”314(1). The first listing652also includes the first percentage316(1) and the second percentage318(1) for the first area312(1), while also containing a warning icon654. The second listing656represents the second area312(2) of the user interface310entitled “Title Bar”314(2). The second listing656also includes the first percentage316(2) and the second percentage318(2) for the second area312(2), while also containing a warning icon658. The warning icons654,658may be displayed in the first and second listings652,656because of the large discrepancies between the first and second percentages316(1),316(2),318(1),318(2) of the first and second areas312(1),312(2). Furthermore, the first and second listings652,656each state that the first and second areas312(1),312(2) are “necessary” for the user interface310, and thus, the heuristic evaluation report600did not provide “suggestions” for how to improve these areas312(1),312(2).

The second text category, or the “Select & Define” category,660includes a third listing662, a fourth listing668, and a fifth listing669. The third listing662represents the third area312(3) of the user interface310entitled “Nav Icons”314(3). The third listing662also includes the first percentage316(3) and the second percentage318(3) for the third area312(3), while also containing a warning icon664. The warning icon664may be displayed because of the large discrepancies between the first and second percentages316(3),318(3) of the third area312(3). The heuristic evaluation report600also includes a suggestion666for the third area312(3) listed in the third listing662. The suggestion666states that “This area is always visible yet least used, consider a different control to access the sub panels.” The fourth and fifth listings668,669represent the fourth and fifth areas312(4),312(5) of the user interface310entitled “Select Panel”314(4) and “Sub-Select Panel”314(5), respectively. The fourth and fifth listings668,669also include the first percentages316(4),316(5) and the second percentages318(4),318(5) for the fourth and fifth areas312(4),312(5), respectively. Because the first percentages316(4),316(5) are substantially equal to the second percentages318(4),318(5) for the fourth and fifth areas312(4),312(5), the fourth and fifth listings668,669do not have warning icons or suggestions on how to improve these areas312(4),312(5).

The third text category, or the “Report & Export” category,670includes a sixth listing672. The sixth listing672represents the sixth area312(6) of the user interface310entitled “Bottom Manual Panel”314(6), where the sixth listing672also includes the first percentage316(6) and the second percentage318(6) for the sixth area312(6). The sixth listing672further includes an information icon674that may be displayed because the sixth area312(6) is frequently used within the user interface310, but occupies a small percentage of the display of the user interface310and is not visible 100% of the time that the user interface310is being operated. The heuristic evaluation report600also includes a suggestion676for the sixth area312(6) in the sixth listing672. The suggestion676states that “This area is the most used yet occupies a small percentage of the screen. Considering making this area larger then retest.”

The fourth text category, or the “Run & Review” category,680includes a seventh listing682. The seventh listing682represents the eighth area312(8) of the user interface310entitled “Top Manual Panel”314(8), where the seventh listing682also includes the first percentage316(8) and the second percentage318(8) for the eighth area312(8). The seventh listing682further includes an information icon684that may be displayed because the eighth area312(8) is frequently used within the user interface310, but occupies a small percentage of the display of the user interface310and is not visible 100% of the time that the user interface310is being operated. The heuristic evaluation report600also includes a suggestion686for the eighth area312(8) in the seventh listing682. The suggestion686states that “This area is frequently used yet occupies a small percentage of the screen. Considering making this area larger then retest.”

The fifth text category, or the “Undefined” category,690includes an eighth listing692. The eighth listing692represents the seventh area312(7) of the user interface310entitled “Map Panel”314(7), where the eighth listing692also includes the first percentage316(7) and the second percentage318(7) for the seventh area312(7), while also containing a warning icon694. The warning icon694may be displayed because of the large discrepancies between the first and second percentages316(7),318(7) of the seventh area312(7). The heuristic evaluation report600also includes a suggestion696for the seventh area312(7) listed in the eighth listing692. The suggestion696states that “This area is the least used yet occupies the highest percentage of the screen. Consider making this area smaller or viewable on demand instead, then retest.”

Thus, according to the heuristic evaluation report600, the third area312(3) and seventh area312(7) are the two potential problems that were referenced in the potential problems listing630. The suggestions666,676,686,696created by the heuristic evaluation report600may provide a developer, programmer, or designer of the user interface310with the identity of the areas312(3),312(6),312(7),312(8) of the user interface310that may be changed, altered, or tweaked to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the user interface310in completing the designated task. The suggestions666,676,686,696created by the heuristic evaluation report600may further provide a developer, programmer, or designer with recommendations for how to improve the areas312(3),312(6),312(7),312(8) identified.

Turning toFIG. 7, illustrated is a flow chart of the steps performed for evaluating a user interface by a plurality of test users. The flow chart illustrated inFIG. 7may be performed by the multiple devices (e.g., server system100and client systems140,140′) illustrated inFIG. 1to operate the user interface evaluation modules142,142′ to track and monitor a test user's interaction and use of a user interface to complete a designated task, and then operate the report generation modules144,144′ to generate a report of the evaluation from the user interface evaluation modules142,142′. At block700, a first test user instructs the first device (e.g., client system140) that the test user wishes to evaluate a user interface. The user interface may be any type of user interface that may be installed on the client system140, including graphical user interfaces. At block705, the first test user instructs a plurality of secondary test users to evaluate the same user interface on their respective secondary devices (e.g., client system140′), where the first test user may further instruct the plurality of secondary test users of a designated task to be completed with the user interface. At block710, the first test user runs the evaluation of the user interface on the first device with the user interface evaluation module142and the secondary test users run the evaluation of the user interface on their respective secondary devices with the user interface evaluations modules142′. The evaluation of the user interface may include tracking or monitoring the visibility and usage (e.g., amount of time each area of the user interface are visible, amount of use each area of the user interface, etc.) of each of the areas of the user interface, as well as the click flow path of the test users, as the test users utilize the user interface to complete the designated task. At block715, the first device sends a signal to the server system (e.g., server system100) to gather the evaluation results from the devices of the test users. At block720, the server system sends a request to the first device and the secondary devices for their respective evaluation results. At block725, the first device and the secondary devices send their respective evaluation results to the server system, in some embodiments, the devices may receive and send their respective evaluation results without interaction or permission from the test users. In other embodiments, the devices may receive a notification that the server system is requesting, the evaluation results for that respective device.

At block730, the server system collects the evaluation results (e.g., amount of time each area of the user interface are visible, amount of use each area of the user interface, etc.) from the first device and the secondary devices. At block735, the server system then sends the collected evaluation results to the first device. At block740, using the report generation module144,144′ the first device generates an evaluation report (illustrated inFIG. 6) for the user interface based on the collected evaluation results from each of the devices. The generated report may presents the discrepancies between the visibility and the usage of each of the areas of the user interface, as well as the click flow path of the test users, as shown in the heuristic evaluation diagram illustrated inFIG. 3. At block745, the user interface may be changed or altered based on the generated report of the evaluation of the user interface for completing a designated task. This may be accomplished manually or automatically by the system.

FIG. 8is a flow chart of an alternative manner for evaluating a user interface by a plurality of test users. The flow chart ofFIG. 8may be performed by the multiple devices illustrated inFIG. 2to operate the user interface evaluation modules142,142′,142″,142′″ to track and monitor a test user's interaction and use of a user interface to complete a designated task, and then operate the report generation module144to generate a report of the evaluation from the user interface evaluation modules142,142′,142″,142′″. At block800, a first test user instructs the first device (e.g., client system140) that the test user wishes to evaluate a user interface. The user interface may be any type of user interface that may be installed on the client system140, including graphical user interfaces. At block805, the first test user instructs a plurality of secondary test users to evaluate the same user interface on their respective secondary devices (e.g., client system140′,140″,140′″), where the first test user may further instruct the plurality of secondary test users of a designated task to be completed with the user interface. At block810, the first test user runs the evaluation of the user interface on the first device and the secondary test users run the evaluation of the user interface on their respective secondary devices. The evaluation of the user interface may include tracking or monitoring the visibility and usage of each of the areas of the user interface, as well as the click flow path of the test users, as the test users utilize the user interface to complete the designated task. At block815, the first device sends a request to the secondary devices for their respective evaluation results. At block820, the secondary devices send their respective evaluation results to the first device. In some embodiments, the devices may receive and send their respective evaluation results without interaction or permission from the test users. In other embodiments, the devices may receive a notification that the first device is requesting the evaluation results for that respective device. At block825, the first device collects the evaluation results (e.g., amount of time each area of the user interface are visible, amount of use each area of the user interface, the click flow path or navigation sequence, etc.) from the secondary devices and combines them with the results from the first device. At block830, using the report generation module144, the first device generates an evaluation report (illustrated inFIG. 6) for the user interface based on the collected evaluation results from each of the devices. The generated report may present the discrepancies between the visibility and the usage of each of the areas of the user interface, as well as the click flow path of the test users, as shown in the heuristic evaluation diagram illustrated inFIG. 3. At block835, the user interface may be changed or altered based on the generated report of the evaluation of the user interface for completing a designated task. This may be accomplished manually or automatically by the system.

It will be appreciated that the embodiments described above and illustrated in the drawings represent only a few of the many ways of implementing embodiments for evaluating user interfaces for their efficiency and effectiveness in completing designated tasks.

The embodiments described above and illustrated in the drawings improve how user interfaces are evaluated to better enable designers and developers of user interfaces to understand how the user interfaces are utilized by end users in completing tasks. The embodiments described above may continuously monitor and track user interfaces for the completion of multiple tasks and may automatically send the evaluation results to a server or other client device that generates evaluation reports. The system may automatically run evaluations of user interfaces to provide designers and developers of user interfaces with updated information on how to improve their user interfaces to better serve the end users in completing tasks. The embodiments described above streamline the development of user interfaces.

It is to be understood that the software (e.g., user interface evaluation module, evaluation collection module, report generating module, etc.) of the present invention embodiments may be implemented in any desired computer language and could be developed by one of ordinary skill in the computer arts based on the functional descriptions contained in the specification and flow charts illustrated in the drawings. Further, any references herein of software performing various functions generally refer to computer systems or processors performing those functions under software control. The computer systems of the present invention embodiments may alternatively be implemented by any type of hardware and/or other processing circuitry.

The software of the present invention embodiments (e.g., user interface evaluation module, evaluation collection module, report generating module, etc.) may be available on a non-transitory computer useable medium (e.g., magnetic or optical mediums, magneto-optic mediums, floppy diskettes, CD-ROM, DVD, memory devices, etc.) of a stationary or portable program product apparatus or device for use with stand-alone systems or systems connected by a network or other communications medium.

The system may employ any number of any conventional or other databases, data stores or storage structures (e.g., files, databases, data structures, data or other repositories, etc.) to store information (e.g., user profiles, user interface area visibility amounts, user interface area usage amounts, user interface click flow path, number of test users, etc.). The database system may be implemented by any number of any conventional or other databases, data stores or storage structures (e.g., files, databases, data structures, data or other repositories, etc.) to store information (e.g., user profiles, user interface area visibility amounts, user interface area usage amounts, user interface click flow path, number of test users, etc.). The database system may be included within or coupled to the server and/or client systems. The database systems and/or storage structures may be remote from or local to the computer or other processing systems, and may store any desired data (e.g., user profiles, user interface area visibility amounts, user interface area usage amounts, user interface click flow path, number of test users, etc.).

The report may include any information arranged in any fashion, and may be configurable based on rules or other criteria to provide desired information to a user (e.g., text analytics, profile scores, user interface area visibility amounts, user interface area usage amounts, user interface click flow path, number of test users, etc.).

The present invention embodiments are not limited to the specific tasks or algorithms described above, but may be utilized for determining an option for any activity between the participants by analyzing the preferences, limitations, and capabilities of each of the participants.