Lect2-3 Theory-Practice_UsabiilityStudies-Oct2014(1)

Copyright T. Komischke, H. Strub, T. Sachs, J. Chin 2014
Lect 13: Theory &
Practice of Usability
Studies
User Experience Design III
John Chin, Ph.D.
jchin@acm.org
973-746-7438
October, 2014
Contact Information

Copyright T. Komischke, H. Strub, T. Sachs, 2014
An broad overview of context
- Who, Anyone
- When, Anytime
- Where, Anywhere
- Why, Motivations
- What, Task
The missing link - How
 Along with some depth on many topics
2

Doctor Who? Who is John Chin?
Education
 Ph.D. in Cognitive Psychology specializing in
 Human Factors
 Human-Computer Interaction
 University of Maryland, College Park (advisor: Kent Norman)
Work Experience
 Currently, User Experience Strategist @ Verizon Wireless
 User research, Writing UI requirements, Usability testing,
 Accessibility, Connected Car, Messaging, 3 patents pending
 HiTech – Contractor Homeland Security, TSA
 Cognetics – Trizetto Group
 Avaya, Alcatel-Lucent, AT&T Bell Labs, Telcordia
 Lewis and Clark College
3

Enough about me, what about you?
Who are you?
 Education and Work experience
 Interests and specialty
Why are you here?
 Goals and Objectives
 Career development, job?
How can I help?
 Needs and Aspirations
 Networking
4

Bottom line goals…
 1) Be neutral and stick to the facts
 2) Advocate for your users, all of them
 Recruit representative sample of eventual product/system users
 Participants – users testing the design/implementation
 Audience – observers (possible development team members)
 Report findings and possible solutions to readers or stakeholders
 Gain better insights and understanding of the issues
 Hope to find possible solutions
 Few hard and fast answers: mainly tradeoffs
5

Planning a Test
 Who: Low vision or Blind user
 Where: Standing on the sidewalk at a bus stop
 When: During rush hour in the morning
 What: Pedestrian getting directions to library
 Why: Pick up model created on 3D printer at library
 How: Mobile device navigation application
6

What are the research questions
 Research questions are not tasks
 Key questions drive focus of the testing and tasks
 Research:
 Can people successfully order products?
 Will customers be able to pay their credit card bill?
 Will radiologists be able to diagnose cases, without errors, efficiently?
 Will consumers like this better than their current camcorder?
 Tasks:
 Typically tasks should be frequent and/or important
 How long will it take customers to find the due date for their current
statement?
7

Where is project in the product life
cycle?
 Early?
 Are there requirements that need to be gathered?
 Or are requirements finalized?
 What’s the shape of design concepts?
 Is this the next version or a new product?
 Some will say “too early for usability” since much is undefined
 Some will say “Do a (user-centered) focus group instead”
 Not yet 100% clear what it does
 Bottom line: A lot is vague, testing can have big impact, but make
sure you’re exploring relevant issues
 Middle of process?
 Requirements finalized
 Screens rough, or designed for usability
 Lots already determined: Use it. [or not, at your own risk]
 Bottom line: Testing can have moderate impact, Fast turnaround
important. Choose issues where you’ll be listened to.
8

Where is the project in the product life
cycle? (continued…)
 Late?
 UI is likely designed
 Possibly even coded
 No leeway on requirements (functionality)
 Delivery possibly even scheduled
 What is the goal?
 If the team will update the UI, could have a meaningful impact
 Fitting some request “It needs usability”
 No-win if in “police” role
 Stakeholder may be looking for “lipstick on the pig”, and endorsement that
“Usability says it’s okay”
 If it misses the mark, you’re in a no-win situation
 Big risk: once it’s delivered, product manager might not want to change UI once
existing customers invested time to learn it.
 Bottom line: be diplomatic & realistic. 1) Consider risks to company
if don’t fix enough, 2) what can be fixed later, and 3) process so won’t
repeat this mess next release or product.
9

Where is the project in the product life
cycle?
 I prefer early-middle, or early
 Beware being brought in late: a no-win game
 Especially if project planned without user research.
 No resources to create prototype (and no time)
 No resources to incorporate results (or time)
 No one might care
 Even if you have a sponsor, you’re being set up for a battle
 Focus on your data. It’s a business decision re what to do.
 Be careful – think high level
 I’ve been surprised many times – people and organizations that seem to
have mature processes
 “organizations” – since companies have silos: one or many organizations
in a company may be awesome. Be careful every time you meet a new
one.
10

What do you know?
 1) The human (in general)
 Topics include:
 Cognitive processor (and memory)
 Perceptual systems
 Social interaction (
 Emotion
 Other topics: Persuasion, attraction, etc.
 If you have time to read, get applied books on these topics
 For topics you really like, get theoretical books; read research
papers.
 If you don’t already have a good book list, I’ll have suggestions next
week
11

What do you know?
 2) Your business:
 If a consultancy (or an experienced department)
 How does your firm approach problems?
 Why do customers choose it?
 Know previous reports – especially with your client
 Know how to leverage templates: research plan, test documents, reports
 Practically: consider ways to promote future work for colleagues – both your team
and other teams [without compromising my integrity]
12

What do you know?
 2) Your business
 If you’re an employee:
 Get to know others in complementary departments
 Market Research (make friends, which also reduces risk of being seen as competition)
 Customer Service (Call Center “top 10” lists)
 Meet, go to lunch, read reports
 VOC (Voice of the Customer) data
 Becoming increasingly popular
 Whatever you have available.
 ForeSee:
Survey at end of visits
13

What do you know?
 2) Your business, if you’re an employee, continued
 VOC data, continued
 OpinionLab
 Input possible on any page
 Works best with meaningful URLs
 Beware:
 Length. Tempting to continue asking questions, but not paying customers
 Order matters: What goes early late, which questions go before others
14

What do you know?
 Analytics (i.e., big data)
15
Copyright M. Tremaine, T. Sachs, A. Melewski 2012
This is a sample, not an Adobe endorsement

What do you know?
 Analytics (i.e., big data)
 The ability to track…
 Beware: What the data makes easy, versus what is of interest
 I have been able to track interactions on a page (sometimes every page), but cannot track a
user through paths
 Who are your company’s customers? Who use online systems?
 How do people access your stuff?
 What are trends?
 Social networking analysis: As many as company follows
 Reports: JD Power, Forrester, Keynote, etc.
 Data collection services, and reports, (usually not cheap)
 Technology trends
 The continuing rise of mobile, tablets
 The impact of OS, browsers, etc.
 Zeitgeist: e.g., Responsive Web Design
16

What will you test with? (1 of 3)
 Paper prototype?
 Cheap, usually easy to create, conceptual
 Who will create?
 Will it be respected internally?
 “Photoshop” [i.e., online] paper prototype more “real” than paper
 Paper does communicate “conceptual”, room for change
 I usually test paper as concepts that extend prototype(s)
17

 Visio? (or similar, PowerPoint can be fast)
 I’m not a “designer” but I can design fairly well in Visio
 If my concepts, I’m in control: can test what I want (or edit myself)
 If my concepts, distracting from focusing on testing
 Key point: Hyperlinks, so it looks like it’s functioning
 More about screens than functionality (won’t function well, i.e., fields
cannot be filled in)
 Something that really runs?: Html, iRise, Axure, Dreamweaver,
Ruby, etc.
 Functionality is great addition to realism, believability
18

 Possibly bad addition to cost, time, and pain, since someone has to
build & support the prototype.
 Arranging for someone to create the prototype can be hard, takes time.
Don’t assume getting resources will be fast/easy.
 For many audiences, many products/systems, this is a necessity
 Even more important for mobile UIs – I believe form factor really
matters for mobile
 What do you think about where mobile is tested? [lab vs. field]
 Trend of hybrid device approach: Big addition to complexity
 Prototype web, tablet, phone?
 iOS ? (pre-7 & 7?), Android (“flavor”?), Windows mobile, Blackberry?
 App versus mobile web?
19

How will you record the test?
 Screen critical – see what happened
 Audio critical – hear what happened,
 High quality audio often undervalued.
 Stereo audio recordings can be especially useful, since with headphones
you can pick out voices
 Very useful: The participant’s face, to see emotions
 Still useful – hands on keyboard, on artifacts, etc.
 Mobile technology especially challenging to record
 Harder to get good screen image
 Want to see what hands do, but hands/fingers cover the screen
 Still want to see face of the participant
20

How many participants to run? (1 of 3)
 Nielsen’s rules of thumb:
 5 or a few more. Go higher if test has truly different groups
 Consider more rounds of testing, if prototyping and time are
available
 I often have trouble getting prototyping for multiple rounds of
testing)
 Bump up numbers a little if only one round of testing
21

 Hank’s rules of thumb
 Arranging a usability test is hard
 Unless really simple, run at least 3 days
 60 minute sessions: 15 participants
 90 minute sessions: 12 participants
 Beware going > 4 days at a crack – exhausting, and too much to analyze
 Too much for industry people to pay attention to
 If need more people, run another series
 Or outsource the usability
22

 How many customer “demographic groups” to recruit
 Rule of thumb: shoot for at least 3 people per demographic
 If differing opinions, still have a tie-breaker
 If a no-show, still have 2
 If it’s a key customer group (i.e., “prospects”) and site is for them,
increase or subdivide that group
 No point in testing 12 groups for study with 15 participants
23

How much time per session?
 Guesstimate: How big/complex does the UI feel?
 If testing in cafeteria (or some place public) keep sessions really
short
 To cover more ground, lots of sessions covering different tasks
 In lab, I believe no shorter than an hour
 Lots of overhead, effort, to recruit, to prep, to get observers, to analyze
 I find it hard to go > 1-1/2 hours
 Sessions are tiring, for participant, moderator, observers
 Hard for many types of participants to get lots of time during business
hours – might get more strange people
 > 90 minutes, schedule in a break (which lowers efficiency)
 I’ve seen 2 and 2-1/2 hour sessions (and no break) in last year – and they worked,
but moderator knew domain well
24

When to schedule sessions?
 Easiest: during business hours
 If live observers, much better to have straight days & business hours
 But will you get enough of “right” people?
 Who are target participants? What are their days like?
 Many jobs: work day
 Physicians: One early (before 9) one at lunch, 1-2 starting at 5 pm
 Think about yourself. I rarely schedule before 10 in Manhattan since
hard to get there and lots to get lab ready.
 If won’t have live observers, can run any time, including a few per
day at odd hours
 For some groups, consider weekends
 But if you have family or other personal issues (like you have a life), get
more money to pay participants
25

When not to schedule sessions
 Consider observers as well as participants
 Holiday season is hard
 If winter, have backup plan
 If big storm might arrive during test, have backup plans
 Allow time for analysis, and for results to be incorporated
 Often have designers responding before discussion.
26

How many sessions to run per day?
 Don’t make testing days too hard on anyone (including the
moderator)
 Want to be as alert, as good of a moderator for first and last session
 Breaks between every session gives flexibility for buggy prototypes,
late participants, rebooting computer, trying something new, etc
 60 minute sessions: up to 5 per day
 Breaks of at least 30 minutes per session (even if just to allow for lateness), 60-90
minutes for lunch
 90 minute sessions: up to 4 per day
 These are more tiring, make sure you have break time
 Schedule lightly on first day of testing, to allow updating of everything –
even your discussion guide, and to plan around unexpecteds
 When possible, run 1 or 2 participants first day, after lunch
27

How to recruit participants? (1 of 2)
 What are you testing? How specialized the community? What’s your
budget? How much time do you have?
 Many options, all involve tradeoffs
 Professional recruiters: For many types of consumers, and some target
audiences (like MDs)
 Most say they’ll recruit anybody for any reason
 Realistically, they have specialties
 Most have “lists” of known people, who may be semi-professional test takers
(some seem jaded)
 Recruiters aren’t cheap
 Lists of customers, you contact yourself
 If you want to test improvements to Emerson’s HMI, want people who know today’s
Emerson HMI
 Beware: lists can take a LONG time to get (6 weeks or more)
 Referrals from sales staff, or from technicians who know their “cool” and
“boring” customers
 Subscriber lists, Professional Society members (especially valuable if want
special expertise)
28

How to recruit participants? (2 of 2)
 Recruiting from your web site
 But any issue having “customer information”?
 Waiting room at medical clinic
 Your card is given out by someone trustworthy (like a doctor)
 “Mechanical Turk” at Amazon
 Craig’s List, or similar ads
 Your friends/acquaintances probably not diverse enough.
 Beware effects of participants feeling obligated
 Children can be especially challenging
 You want parents to be nearby so everyone is trusting, but you have to
keep them occupied
29

Who to recruit
 If clear that there’s one demographic (or “persona”), go for it
 But consider going for sub-demographics as more participants
 I usually shoot for up to 3, maybe 4 max, demographic groups.
 Product space may be much broader
 Target groups that are truly different, in parameters that matter to your UI
 Many factors can be targeted independently, with same participants. E.g.:
 Ranges for age, education, income
 Separate from experience in what you’re testing
 Avoid trap of recruiting only the young/well-educated
 They look nice on video, have great things to say, but…
 Unless all users will be young and well-educated
 I learn a lot from diversity
30

Who to recruit: Common screening
criteria (1 of 2)
 No one in your industry, or with a household member in your industry
 No one in design or usability
 Always ask for a range, within whatever criteria.
 If open to unemployed or retired, they’re probably easier to find for
“business hours” studies than people who work, so “up to 2”
 Internet skill: Want people who use web themselves, often, familiar
 Age: cover diversity of your user community
 I’m pushing for older but not above 69
 Many older users, but tend to talk more, and therefore get less done (in my
experience)
 I’ve had most dishonesty with elders: age (not be too old), internet skills
 Consider gender distribution
31

Who to recruit: Common screening
criteria (2 of 2)
 Education: I’ve known researchers who screen for minimum of some
college for general consumer products.
 Getting some without college is more honest test of usability, for those with
low literacy skills – who buy and use things
 I’m often fascinated with responses of those with least education
 Ethnic diversity
 Income: As low as appropriate. If you want some truly wealthy
people, might need to specially recruit and pay more
 But can ask for people whose speech is easy to understand (critical)
 Where they live: City vs. suburb; and which city (Philly vs. NY)
32

Special participants: Children, Disabled,
Employees
 Children:
 Want a witness, at all times
 Parent should be nearby
 Make it fun
 Recruit so you’ll get interested kids
 Disabled
 Hard enough to get disabled with full cognitive skill
 Check literature if recruiting disabled without full cognitive skill
 Employees
 Is it their choice? Coerced?
 Impact of losing time on job
 Fear if criticize system, or people, when it’s recorded
33

Possible Forms for participants (1 of 2)
 Informed consent form has two goals:
 Inform participants of what they’ll be doing, realistically, any risks (even of
embarrassment), and benefits (often, interesting tasks; chance to help
change a product; and get paid)
 Consent: So it’s clear what they’re consenting to
 Media Release:
 That you are recording them
 How recordings will be used (for study, nothing else)
 Can protect you as well as participants: if colleague loves a clip- wants to
show at a conference (“Sorry!”)
 If session is that good, can go back and pay more, or recreate the scene
with actors
34

Possible Forms for participants (2 of 2)
 NDA (Non-disclosure Agreement)
 If you’re showing proprietary concepts
 Explain NDA too – so understand
 I’ve heard that a properly written and executed NDA protects even if
people talk – you did your due diligence
 Liability release (?)
 In case incidentally hurt when coming to your facility
 Include conditions that lawyers want
 But fight for plain language
 Long forms are harder to understand –consider more short forms
than fewer long forms
35

Don’t fight the law (but then I’m married
to a lawyer)
 This is probably all new for most corporate council
 Draft pretty good sample forms before approaching
 Shows you know something
 Easier to edit than start from scratch
 Be able to explain what’s there, why, who and what your intentions
are
 Provide articles on what you’re after, or books
 Negotiate, but with the company’s best interests in mind
36

How much to pay participants?
 Goldilocks rule of thumb:
 Not too much, not to little
 If doing internal testing on employees, might be limited by corporate
rules (participants already missing work during work time
 For external participants, ask your recruiter for advice
 Consider adding in reasonable extra payment for
transportation/parking costs
 BTW, if paying a participant more than $500 in a year, check with
company HR about possible need to report “salary” to IRS
 Only an issue if have same person return
37

Should I use floaters?
 Floaters are backup participants, usually recruited to cover two
sessions
 Extremely valuable in case of no-show
 Also, for when a participant is totally inappropriate
 But, who has time to hang out for 2 sessions? Be careful
 I use best recruiter I can, request to go for 100% turnout
 I’ve had odd birds as floaters
38

How to record a test?
 Morae, by Techsmith: The “Honda Fit” of usability recording:
 $1500 for a full license
 Records two streams, usually screen and webcam on face, as well as an
audio stream
 If built-in mic isn’t awesome, get a good external mic
 1copy of Morae includes 1 copy of “Observer”, which lets people in
another room watch live (delayed ~20 seconds)
 Very reliable
 Not bad to learn, to set up
 Can take notes, and make marks, live (but I don’t see that done)
 Will make highlights videos
 Pretty efficient storage, so many sessions can go on a DVD
39

Recording a test – More on Morae
 Morae also good for portable lab – only need 2 laptops
 Requirements for computers not clear: doesn’t reflect multi-core
processors
 In my experience, Morae has run fine on machines well below the
“minimum recommended” capability
 A hack to get 3 images is a hardware video mixer, that will
superimpose for you.
40

Recording a test: Lots of fancier
software, but..
 Pricier, need fancier computer and equipment, can be testier
 I know many big companies use OvoStudios
 My personal experience: very nice & helpful, not as reliable as I’d
like
 But I’ve heard of companies that find it trustworthy
 Network to find something that works for your needs.
 Consider:
 HD looks great, awesome detail
 Probably not needed for routine recordings of basic web sites
41

Recording a test: Back to mobile
 How to get a good screen? Apple to HDMI to DVI cable, or Apple TV
hack if security allows
 License supports 3 images – I think all 3 are important
 [Note: target area – ask participants to keep the phone THERE
42

Other Technology Issues:
 Eye Tracking: compelling to watch, help observers stay awake
 Beware of heat maps: If interrupt participants, etc.
 Magic is uninterrupted, enough people to get good trends, so software can
analyze what happened
 Web site also needs to support eye tracking: overlays, modals mess things
up
 Software only knows the URL, not what’s on screen
 Emotion tracking: GSR (how emotional) and valence (+/-)
 Affectiva is a company to watch
43

The Moderator’s Guide (1 of 4)
 Introduction
 Why you’re there
 That this is usability so
 A) Please speak aloud (we’ll practice),
 B) Testing the UI, not testing you,
 C) Don’t worry about errors since prototype (not real data or system)
 Ask questions (though I might not answer)
 Can stop at any time, for any reason
 Pay at beginning of session: Show trust (people don’t walk away)
 Plan the task list
 Based on the research questions
 Ideally, based on your knowledge:
 What are the true top tasks (consider what Gartner, JD Power say)
44

Moderator’s Guide (2 of 4)
 Think about time. Consider optional tasks to fill sessions for fast
participants.
 Or have an extra task or two, and prioritize list in pilot sessions
 Moderator’s guide: By each task I like to have questions to probe,
and suggested things to observe
 Participant’s guide just has the tasks – other stuff is deleted
 Edit moderator’s guide, either regenerate Participant’s guide, or be careful
on version control.
 Questions to ask:
 Per task: Make sure to ask the goal of the task
 Find a value? Perform a task
 Otherwise, think about what you’ll learn
 Can ask questions like “How quickly do you expect to do this task? How easy do you expect
this task to be?
 After: How easy was it to perform this task? How often do you perform this task?
45

 Questions to ask: At end of Session
 I like to ask:
 What did you like best about the prototype system?
 What did you like least about the prototype system?
 [Sometimes in form of “What were 3 best & 3 worst things?”]
 The SUS is trendy [SUS = System Usability Scale]
 Original by John Brooke, 1986, DEC
46

47
The original SUS

 Thoughts on SUS:
 Alternates positive and negative questions, so respondent needs to be
awake
 Around since the 80’s, lots of experience in the industry
 A few common updates [i.e., “website” instead of “system”]
 Like school grading: 70 is okay, 80 good, 90 superb
 But maybe UI’s are better these days -> I’ve seen mainly upper 80’s or
better
 Net Promoter Score (NPS): How likely are you to recommend this
product/company to a friend?
 Trendy, originally published in Harvard B-School Journal
 Were participants supposed to learn something?
 Though be careful about testing learning in 1-hour long session, unless
that’s what system is for
 1 hr not much time to learn, especially when many tasks
48

Cautions on locations (1 of 2)
 Dedicated lab:
 Will you use it enough? Perhaps try lending it out, but beware…
 Sufficient staff support? [reception & waiting area, space for observers who
have meetings, snacks & drinks and meals]
 Window: Great, but then keep observer room quiet and dark
 Need to keep equipment secure
 Conference rooms and a portable Morae lab
 Still have to keep laptops secure
 Will you always get good rooms for test when you need them?
 Others’ office
 Conference rooms: Will your Morae computers run on their network? If not,
how will they communicate?
 Fairly safe from interruptions, though.
 Cubes: Beware interruptions… Phone will ring & cube’nik might need to
pick up; Co-workers don’t recognize you as important
 Offices: Probably okay as long as participant respects you
49

Cautions on locations (2 of 2)
 Remote Testing
 Success depends on installing web-sharing software, but software,
computers and bandwidth are all pretty good
 Usually only 5 minutes, sometimes much worse
 Better with web cam
 Surprisingly to me, rarely interrupted, but phone calls seem to be
respected
 3rd party facility (i.e., market research company)
 Surprisingly pricey – be prepared for unexpected costs
 But they handle the details – REALLY nice
 When I use a facility, I have them recruit – so one point of failure
 Even professionals sometimes use cafeteria, or Starbucks
 Best for quick “first impression” studies, lots of people in little time
 Can recruit for more in-depth study (follow-up in lab…)
50

Screen-sharing software, for remote live
observers
 Easiest to use the corporate standard
 It’s IT-endorsed
 No firewall issues
 Account likely easy to set up, and/or use
 If there’s a problem, you used what company wanted
 Otherwise, I believe in WebEx & a telephone bridge
 Usually reasonably pain-free to install
 Performance (delay, quality, frame-rate) pretty good
 Not cheapest, but trustworthy is important to me
51

Running a Test52

Be like Johnny Carson
(Used to host The Tonight Show)
 Always genial, friendly
 Show was about the guest(s), not him
 THEIR thoughts & opinions
 Johnny didn’t lead
 But he got guests to talk
 When there was a problem, he took the blame (never the guest’s fault
unless something terrible)
 Was incredible at improvising
 For more on Johnny, watch for rebroadcast of PBS documentary
53

Taking notes during:
 If you follow template strictly and have time, excel template for all
key questions and observation points is neat
 Time consuming to set up
 Not convenient to use when with participant
 Can take notes with computer
 Not best for establishing rapport
 Take notes at a constant pace (lots of them)
 So don’t communicate what you care about
 So writing when participant thinks they’ve said something important
 Compatriot’s notes (ideally, not in sight of participant) can be great,
but everyone looks for different things
 Who will be lead on the report?
54

Things to watch during session55

What to do if: (1 of 2)
 Participant is no-show
 Ask to arrive 15 minutes early: time for forms, for bathroom, and to call
recruiter before session time
 Call recruiter – check on reminders
 Backup slots available?
 If remote, can’t get to internet
 Common to get weird firewall issues
 Have a local copy
 Prototype fails
 Computer fails
 Participant arrives quite late
 Running really behind. Participant’s a talker, trouble, started late
 Participant wants bathroom break, but already behind
56

What to do if: (2 of 2)
 Early in session, can see that participant doesn’t fit the study?
 It appears that participant lied to recruiter re something key? (After
all, these studies pay well and economy is bad)
 You give cash or check to participant at start of session, and he/she
gets up and leaves?
 Participant admits to having committed a crime on your video
recording? (“When I do my taxes, I don’t put in all the receipts”)
 You have strong evidence that participant is victim of or commits
abuse, or is considering suicide?
57

After a test
 Debriefs are great. Consider recording them if you don’t take good
notes.
 Write down first impressions of results while they’re fresh in your
mind.
 Get invoices in promptly: * participants *, recruiter, and any vendor
you might use again
 Return borrowed equipment promptly (before damaged, lost)
 Listen to sessions as “background music”. You will hear things
 Push self for rapid turn-around.
 Consider rehash/highlights meeting immediately afterwards, recorded, to
get impressions of observers
 Tight deadline for report doesn’t allow forgetting
 But beware getting slammed if rest of your job fell behind due to time away for
testing
58

Copyright T. Komischke, H. Strub, T. Sachs, J. Chin 2014
Questions?

Lect2-3 Theory-Practice_UsabiilityStudies-Oct2014(1)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Lect2-3 Theory-Practice_UsabiilityStudies-Oct2014(1)

Semelhante a Lect2-3 Theory-Practice_UsabiilityStudies-Oct2014(1) (20)

Lect2-3 Theory-Practice_UsabiilityStudies-Oct2014(1)

Notas do Editor