The Usability Evaluation Process

Since the the very beginning of the Internet era, researchers have been proposing new and refined methodologies for usability evaluation (Alexander and Baravalle, 2011) . Beirekdar et al, (2003) state that usability is a major factor in the quality and success of a web site. However, a large amount of data is not reachable to all users, due to usability and accessibility problems in web sites and for this reason the development of usability standards and guidelines was necessary (Jasselette et al, 2007). Several literature sources informed this discussion, including (Nielsen 1992; Shneiderman 1998, Brooke).

4.10.1 Nielsen’s Usability Heurustics for User Interface Design

According to Nielsen (1992), heuristic evaluation is a method for finding usability problems in a user interface design by having a small set of evaluators examine the interface and judge its compliance with recognized usability principles. The ten most general principles for interaction design (the “heuristics”):

1.Visibility of system status: The website always keeps the user’s informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time

2. Match between system and the real world: The website speaks the users’ language, with words, phrases, and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms.

3. User control and freedom: Users have the flexibility to stop the process and leave any time they wish

4. Recognition rather than recall: The website provides the user with all booking information already filled by the user in order not have to remember information from one part to another 5. Flexibility and efficiency of use: Accelerators -- unseen by the novice user – websites allows users to tailor frequent actions (i.e. go to checkout without giving all details)

6. Careful use of colour: colour used in the website is balanced.

7. Symmetry and Style: website’s layout is symmetric 8. Depth of field: website uses layers in images

9. Consistent visual style: website targets older and economic independent clients/users and uses more restful, natural images

10. Visibility of identity and brand: the brand name of the hotel is visible in a consistent manner

According to Yatsenko et al (2002), this list is based on personal observations of J. Nielsen and is not supported by any empirical evidence.

58 4.10.2 Shneiderman’s Eight Golden Rules of Interface

Shneiderman’s theory is very similar to Nielsen’s and is based on a very general set of eight rules that include:

1. Strive for consistency: Consistent sequences of actions should be required in similar situations

2. Enable frequent users to use shortcuts: Abbreviations, function keys, hidden commands, and macro facilities are very helpful to an expert user

3. Offer informative feedback: For every operator action, there should be some system feedback 4. Design dialogue to yield closure: Sequences of actions should be organized into groups with a beginning, middle, and end

5. Offer simple error handling: As much as possible, design the system so the user cannot make a serious error

6. Permit easy reversal of actions: This feature relieves anxiety, since the user knows that errors can be undone; it thus encourages exploration of unfamiliar options

7. Support internal locus of control: Design the system to make users the initiators of actions rather than the responders.

8. Reduce term memory load: The limitation of human information processing in short-term memory requires that displays be kept simple

Both Nielsen heuristics and Shneiderman Eight Golden Rules of Interface, are too general and do not actually reveal what is going on during the customers’ decision making process when they come to apply online booking. By applying these theories to this study, the requested customers’ critical information requirements will not be addressed and will not identify whether these customers’ critical information requirements are met and as a result the hotel website really supports customers’ decision making.

4.10.3 System Usability Scale (SUS)

The System Usability Scale (SUS) is the most popular standardized usability questionnaire. SUS was developed at Digital Equipment Corporation by John Brooke in the 1980′s. It is popular for two reasons: it's free and short (at only 10 questions). SUS is used by many researchers and it has been found to be a remarkable, strong measure of system usability (Katsanos et al, 2012; Tullis and Stetson 2004; Bangor et al 2008;

Sauro and Lewis 2009; Lewis and Sauro 2009). Sauro in (2011) examined the influence of prior experience with a website on the users’ SUS scores. Using a large dataset from 62 websites he found that “repeat users rated the websites as 11% more usable than first-time users". Simoes and de Moraes in (2012) applied SUS to evaluate the usability

59 of the virtual learning environment adopted by the Distance Education Center of the Federal Institute of Espírito Santo – Brazil, which has the Moodle platform as a basis.

They found that “the SUS questionnaire is an objective and efficient tool to have a notion about the usability and users' satisfaction”. Granic and Cukusic in (2011) used SUS among other usability evaluation techniques to evaluate UNITE, an e-learning platform to support education in European secondary schools. Students’ average satisfaction was59.36. They also found that there was a significant negative correlation (r=-0.467) between the SUS score and age. Katsanos et al (2012) investigated the validity and reliability of a Greek version of SUS. Analysis of the results showed that the Greek SUS questionnaire is both reliable and valid.

The survey then provided the following 10 standard statements with 5 response options (5-point Likert scale with anchors for Strongly agree and Strongly disagree):

4.10.3.1 The 10 SUS statements

a) I think that I would like to use this system frequently.

b) I found the system unnecessarily complex.

c) I thought the system was easy to use.

d) I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this system.

e) I found the various functions in this system were well integrated.

f) I thought there was too much inconsistency in this system.

g) I would imagine that most people would learn to use this system very quickly.

h) I found the system very cumbersome to use.

i) I felt very confident using the system.

j) I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this system.

4.10.3.2 Advantages of System Usability Scale (SUS)

One of the primary advantages of SUS is that it has been effectively applied on a variety of software and devices and it is characterized as “technology agnostic” (Katsanos et al 2012, Bangor et al 2008). According to Brooke (1996), SUS is: [i] reliable: if you use it on different occasions on the same system with similar users, you'll likely get approximately the same result, [ii] valid: it does actually measure approximately what it claims to measure, that is whether or not the users perceive a system to be usable or not and [iii]comparable: you can compare your results from SUS with other people's results

60 to establish whether your system is more or less usable. Tullis and Stetson (2004) state that a sample of 12 users provides the correct findings, same as larger sample 90-100%

of the time and a sample of 10 users 75-80% of the time. According to Jokela et al (2006), SUS is proposed to be used as a means for a system’s quantitative usability requirements. For the purposes of this study, SUS is used to assess whether the original design is effective and whether the (re)design of the webpages has improved usability.

4.11 Conclusion

The website for a hotel constitutes not only a vital tool for revenue generation but also the most critical marketing tool for the appropriate presentation of the hotel image and reputation. Consequently, it has to meet and exceed customers’ critical information requirements and should be a top priority for all hoteliers. It is reasonable that a hotel website that provides the customers with all customers’ critical information requirements, it is more likely to achieve the booking and attain returning customers.

Various website characteristics should be applied in accordance to CCIRs. The Golden Triangle rule is a proved and tested theory of customers’ observation at a screen. The website navigation, friendliness of the webpage, striking photos, search, navigation and many other aspects should be the base for the hotel website construction.

User-centered flow was followed in order to set up a hotel website user-centered model.

According to this model, all hotel webpage construction has to be CCIRs oriented and try to alter lookers into bookers.

It is of utmost importance for hoteliers to invest in turning “lookers into bookers”. Web design, website usability, customer-centered web design will play a fundamental role in targeting CCIRs, satisfying them. This is essential for delivering hotel website success.

61

5