DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.12187614
title: Supporting information of a study for the definition and evaluation of a graphical user interface for housing co-design

description: This dataset is from a study that intends to define, prototype and test a graphical user interface for a housing co-design system. To define the requirements of the interface, we conducted interviews with professionals of architecture, urbanism and social sciences areas. An interface solution was prototyped, tested and refined. Then we conducted a heuristic evaluation and a summative evaluation. Such evaluations involved the testing of a high-fidelity prototype, to receive feedback from UX/UI experts, potential users (inhabitants) and architects.

S1_File refers to the results of the heuristic evaluation, and includes the identification of each issue, which expert (anonymized) identified such issue, and the heuristic it violates, with the sum of the times each heuristic was violated at the end of each collumn. At the right, a table presents the consolidation of issues, organized by priority, with columns identifying the issue, severity level, frequency, and priority.

S2_File refers to the description of the usability issues. The first page is the organisation of the issues by severity (left) and priority (right). The remaining pages have a table for each issue, including rows for problem designation, heuristic violated, problem description, solution proposal, severity degree, and an image of the interface pointing to the referred issue.

S3_File refers to the results of the summative evaluation with inhabitants (potential users).



Page A refers to the preliminary questionnaire that includes demographic information such as age, gender, education, relationship with digital technologies, etc. Each field has a correspondence with each inhabitant (anonimized) and the sum and percentage. In the middle, a table presents a summary with the consolidation. In the right possible relations are presented. 

Page B presents the results of the SEQ questionnaire, identifying the ratings that each inhabitant (anonymized) gave to each task. At the right a summary of such values. 

Page C is the result of each rating for the SUS questionnaire given by each inhabitant (anonymized). At the bottom is the calculation os SUS score.

Page D presents the results of the GUI questionnaire for each inhabitant (anonymized) with the average and SD identified for each question. At the right there is a summary of such results

Page E holds the notes taken by the researchers based on their observations regarding the task performance. The information is organized in tables for each step of each task, and includes the completeness, attempts and time taken for each inhabitant (anonymized) to complete such task. Also the sum, percentage, average and SD is registered. Next to each task, is a table identifying how many participants accomplished the task at the first attempt.

Page F refers to the strong and weak aspects identified by the inhabitants. Strong and weak aspects are identified as well as which inhabitant (anonymized) has identified it. The sum and percentage is also given. At the right there is a table with the consolidation of results, by combining similar answers. 


S4_File is the script given to the potential users for experimenting the interface during the summative evaluation. Such script guides the user about the tasks to perform, since the prototype has not all the features functioning.

S5_File refers to the questionnaires applied during the summative evaluation with inhabitants. It includes a preliminary questionnaire, a Single Ease Question (SEQ) questionnaire, a System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire, and a Graphical User Interface (GUI) questionnaire.

S6_File refers to the results of the discussion with architects after experiencing the interface. Such results are related to the positive and negative aspects that the architects identified in the interface and its usefulness for architecture. The left table identifies the strong and weak aspects, which architects (anonymized) identified it, and the sum and percentage associated. The table on the right is the consolidation of such results, with similar responses combined.