IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v35y2016i8p680-689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Age and domain specific usability analysis of opinion visualisation techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Azra Shamim
  • Vimala Balakrishnan
  • Muhammad Tahir
  • Muhammad Ahsan Qureshi

Abstract

This study analysed the impact of age and domain knowledge on the usability of some of the state-of-the-art opinion visualisation techniques. A questionnaire survey was designed to ask the users’ level of agreement or disagreement about the selected opinion visualisation techniques against a set of information visualisation metrics. The data were collected by conducting seminars and using a web-based online questionnaire. We categorised participants (N = 146) into three age groups (≤20 years: teenager; 21–30 years: young adults; >30: adults). According to domain knowledge, participants are classified into two groups, one having knowledge of human computer interaction (HCI users) and the other without this knowledge (non-HCI users). The collected data were analysed using an independent sample t-test and analysis of variance. It is concluded that there are significant differences between the perception of HCI and non-HCI users on visual appeal, understandability, user friendliness, intuitiveness, informativeness, usefulness, comprehensiveness, comparison ability, and pre-knowledge requirement. Moreover, age was found to be significant for visual appeal, comprehensiveness, intuitiveness, and pre-knowledge requirement.

Suggested Citation

  • Azra Shamim & Vimala Balakrishnan & Muhammad Tahir & Muhammad Ahsan Qureshi, 2016. "Age and domain specific usability analysis of opinion visualisation techniques," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(8), pages 680-689, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:35:y:2016:i:8:p:680-689
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2016.1141235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1141235
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1141235?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:35:y:2016:i:8:p:680-689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.