Ethool usability evaluation

Citation Author(s):
Ainara
Garzo
TECNALIA, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA)
Nestor
Garay-Vitoria
Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, Computer and Architecture department
Submitted by:
Ainara Garzo
Last updated:
Sun, 02/14/2021 - 16:49
DOI:
10.21227/m8yv-0133
Data Format:
License:
0
0 ratings - Please login to submit your rating.

Abstract 

 

The data include:

  • Demographic data of the participants including: gender, group of participation and number of years in the company.
  • Results of the use of Ethool including: expended time and subjective evaluation of if using a Likert of 5 points. Two different files are available corresponding to each iteration (prototype 1 and prototype 2).
  • Results of the SUS questionnaire for both iterations (prototype 1 and prototype 2).
Instructions: 

The evaluation included two iterations. Usability was measured between iterations, and improvements between iterations were implemented in the prototypes. The files include the following information:

  • Demographic data of the participants including gender, group of participation and number of years in the company.
  • Results of the use of the Ethool tool including: expended time and subjective evaluation of it using a Likert of 5 points. Two different files are available corresponding to each iteration (prototype 1 and prototype 2).
  • Results of the SUS questionnaire [1] for both iterations (prototype 1 and prototype 2). A Python script has been developed for the SUS questionnaire data process [2], according to the literature [3].

[1]    J. Sauro, “Measuring Usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS),” MeasuringU. 2011, Accessed: May 31, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://measuringu.com/sus/.[2]    A. Garzo, “agarzo/sus_process python code,” GitHub. 2020, Accessed: Jul. 29, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/agarzo/sus_process.[3]    A. Bangor, P. Kortum, and J. Miller, “Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale,” J. Usability Stud., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 114–123, 2009.