Usability 1
COGNITIVEWALKTHROUGH
<StudentName>
State
BournemouthUniversity Payment Gateway Usability Test
Thetypical users.
Itmainly caters to students. Other users may include the school staffand parents or guardians.
Thetask scenarios.
Thepayment gateway is connected to numerous other websites that offer orneed payment services. Their main tasks include paying for SportsMemberships. Students are coming into the university by registeringthrough the Online Registration Form. Staff or students who havevehicles use the Parking Permit service. When replacing certificatesor transcripts, one uses the Replacement Document Ordering System.One can use the CPD web site for uninterrupted career development.Parents who want to pay for their children use Ad Hoc Payments.
Taskgoals, relevant subtasks and sub-goals.
Themain goal and task are the transfer of funds and documents to andfrom the school. Sub-goals and tasks involve the provision of an easyaccess and retrieval to crucial elements at the university. Thisincludes getting a parking permit and the requesting of specialschool documents such as transcripts and certificates.
Thetasks will aim to answer the following questions.
“Will the user know what sub-goal they want to achieve?”
“Will the user notice that is the correct action?”
“Will the user understand that the action can achieve the sub-goal?”
“Does the user get feedback from the action?”
Task:Home Page – Log in.
1.Yes.
2.Yes.
3.Yes, (Blackmonet al., 2002).
4.Yes.
Task:Personal Details.
1.Yes.
2.Yes.
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
Task:Billing Address Details.
1.Yes, (Nielsen,1994).
2.Yes.
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
Task:Payment Card Details.
1.Yes, (Holzinger,2005).
2.Yes.
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
Task:Order Summary Details.
1.Yes.
2.Yes.
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
Task:PARes
1.No. the data is too complex to process the user only presses thesubmit button to complete the process.
2.Yes.
3.No, they only submit the data because that is the only buttonprovided.
4.No, the process should be simplified for the user to know what theyare doing. They have no control in the process.
Task:Confirmation Details.
1.Yes.
2.No, there are no navigation buttons in this page which may confusethe user.
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
Task:The Second Option.
1.Yes.
2.Yes, (Sears,1997).
3.Yes.
4.Yes.
ReferencingList
Blackmon,M.H., Polson, P.G., Kitajima, M., Lewis, C., 2002. CognitiveWalkthrough for the Web, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference onHuman Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’02. ACM, New York, NY,USA, pp. 463–470. doi:10.1145/503376.503459
Holzinger,A., 2005. Usability Engineering Methods for Software Developers.Commun ACM 48, 71–74. doi:10.1145/1039539.1039541
Nielsen,J., 1994. Usability Inspection Methods, in: Conference Companion onHuman Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’94. ACM, New York, NY,USA, pp. 413–414. doi:10.1145/259963.260531
Sears,A., 1997. Heuristic Walkthroughs: Finding the Problems Without theNoise. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 9, 213–234.doi:10.1207/s15327590ijhc0903_2