Universiti Utara Malaysia

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
INTERACTION DESIGN
SCIM 2413 (GROUP A)
HEURISTIC EVALUATION REPORT
DR. ASMIDAH BINTI ALWI
PREPARED BY:
NAME MATRIC NO
KUMARESAN A/L ARAPURENADZAN 277489
ANGELINA A/P TOMAS 278387
MERZHA ATHIR BIN MOHD RETHDUAN 281397
SOFEA NATASYA MICHAEL 278575
NOR FARAHIN BINTI RAMLI 281995
Content
1.0 Introduction
A heuristic evaluation is an overall review of your product, website, or app, with regards to
the user experience. We are looking for gaps in the experience, and judging our website
against common usability heuristics. Megaloka was created especially for camping
enthusiasts and people who love to try a new thing! Since Malaysia is known for its tropical
beauty, and both locals and travellers love to camp out in scenic places. In this website users
can explore the hots places to camping and glamping with their loved ones! By conduct this
evaluation, we can Identify and focus on specific issues without having to speak to our users.
We typically frame the evaluation with an overarching scenario the user is going through.
Using a task makes it easier to get into the user's perspective and allows the evaluators to
remember the user's goals. Overall, what we want out of a heuristic evaluation is a clear list
of usability problems, which heuristics that we violate, and how severely they impact the
user.
2.0 Evaluation Process
A Heuristic Evaluation first comprises of a specific task or scope that the leader and
participating evaluators must take into account while navigating the website. Evaluators are
then instructed to review the site according to the question that our team has provided and the
have to report any usability problems they encounter while browsing our website. In the
google form there are 25 question and has six different sections. Those section are visibility
of system state, match between system and the real world, user control and freedom,
consistency and standards, recognition rather than recall, flexibility and aesthetic and
minimalist design. For this evaluation, we choose two experts which are Dr. Ruzinoor Che
Mat and Prof. Ts. Dr. Juliana Aida. They are both SCIMPA lecturers with vast experience in
this field. Both of them helps us so much and give a specifics comment and it does make our
task easier. As a result, we trust their feedback and evaluations in order to improve our
website.
1
3.0 Before and after
As we know, we have six different sections and different answers from each expert. So, in
section one we focused on visibility of system state. Basically, is a how well the state of the
system is conveyed to its users. Ideally, systems should always keep users informed about
what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time. Both evaluators have
a different opinion. Because of the negative feedbacks from the evaluator, we changed the
design scheme of our website and make it more rational. We also change the background just
to make sure the users know where
are they is at any given moment.
Here is the before and after.
In section 2 we asked about match between system and the real world. These heuristic states
that the system should speak the users’ language, phrases and concepts familiar to the user,
rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information
2
appear in a natural and logical order. Both experts agree that our website speak the user’s
language but can be improved more in future.
Next, in section 3, we asked about user control and freedom. This section we got different
answers from each evaluator. Some say yes and some says no about “can users move forward
and backward between fields or options?” We know that if we missed providing the user the
control and freedom over the things they are using, they will abandon our product. It's very
important to provide them the option to correct their mistakes or undo & redo their
unintentional clicks. One evaluator says that it is difficult to move back and forward and
some are not functioning. We did change the control system and hope it helps our users to use
our website easily.
In section 4, we asked evaluators about consistency and standards. Consistency & Standards
are the key value of any product, brand, or identity. In simple term, A system or a product
should never ever confuse the users by using different words, actions, design, or situations to
derive the same meaning. We got a positive response from both experts and we glad that our
website is standardized but still have more spaces for improvement.
Section 5 we mainly focused on recognition rather than recall. It is important to minimize the
user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have
3
to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the
system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate. Recognition is easier
than recall because it involves more cues. All those cues spread activation to related
information in memory, raise the answer's activation, and make you more likely to pick it.
Both experts give us positive feedback on this section.
Last section which is section six, we asked and focused on aesthetic and minimalist design.
Aesthetic and minimalist design is completely based on how much information is required or
relevant to showcase for the betterment of the users. The signal-to-noise ratio can be used to
determine what information is useful and what information is irrelevant in a user interface.
For the user, any important information in the interface is the signal, whereas unnecessary
information is noise. However, it is entirely dependent on the user's intent. Both experts give
positive and negative feedbacks. Both of them agreed that we put an effort in application
designed with proper grouping, colours and use of good shapes. But we must to do some
improvement in labels brief. We changed a proper background and use more decent photos
to attract more targeted users.
4
4.0 Conclusion
Our website prototype appears to have a lot of room for development, according to the
professionals that reviewed it. We always try to come up with an interface design that is
appropriate for the user experience, so that the user feels at ease and at ease when using it.
We believed that, this website still has to be improved in order to ensure that it will be able
to meet the expectations of our targeted users. With this information and feedbacks from
experts, we can make quick and informed changes to improve the experience of Megaloka.

Universiti Utara Malaysia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Universiti Utara Malaysia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Universiti Utara Malaysia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

HEURISTIC EVALUATION REPORT

DR. ASMIDAH BINTI ALWI

2.0 Evaluation Process

You might also like