Investigating Usability Constructs in a Content Management System

İnternet, bireylerin bilgisayar sistemleri ile etkileşim sağladığı medya açısından zengin bir ortam sunmaktadır. Bilgisayarlar ve bireylar arasındaki bu etkileşimli ortam, sosyoteknik bir açıdan incelenebilir. Bu nedenle, bireylerin yeni teknolojiye yönelik davranışlarını, internet teknolojileri ile olan deneyimlerine ve içerik yönetimine dayalı olarak inceleme, araştırmalarda alternatif bir yaklaşım olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Bireylerin davranışları, web sitelerinin kullanışlılığından çok fazla etkilenmektedir. Bu görüşten hareketle bu çalışmanın amacı, bir içerik yönetim sisteminin kullanışlılık yapılarını çok boyutluluk açısından araştırmaktır. Bulgular, kullanışlılık açısından en az iki olmak üzere model olarak çok boyutlu bir yapının varlığını göstermektedir. Bu bulgu, kullanışlılık açısından sosyoteknik bakış açısı ile içerik sunumunun ve mimari tasarımın farklı yapılar olarak ele alınması gerektiği görüşünü desteklemektedir.

İçerik Yönetim Sisteminde Kullanılabilirlik Yapılarının İncelenmesi

The internet provides a media-rich navigational environment where people interact with computer systems. This interactive relationship between humans and computers can be explored from a socio-technical philosophy. Thus, investigating individual behaviors toward new information technologies based on their experiences with the internet technology in general, and content management in particular emerged as an alternative stream of research. Since users' behaviors are heavily influenced by web sites usability, this study is aimed at exploring multidimensionalty in usability constructs of a content management system. The findings indicate that multidimensional model - at least- with two upper constructs exist in usability. This finding supports the socio-technical perspective in usability in that content presentation and architectural design were perceived as separate constructs by participants.

___

  • Ackerman, T. A., Gierl, M. J., & Walker, C. M. (2003). An NCME instructional module on using multidimensional item response theory to evaluate educational and psychological tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(3), 37-53.
  • Bevan, N. (2001). International Standards for HCI and Usability. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 55(4), 533-552.
  • Bentley, R., Rodden, T., Sawyer, P., & Sommerville, I. (1992). An architecture for tailoring cooperative multi-user displays. Proceedings of CSCW 92, (pp. 187-194). New York, NY: ACM.
  • Brinck, T., Gergle, D., & Wood, S.D. (2002). Designing Web sites that work: Usability for the Web, Morgan Kaufmann Publishing, San Francisco.
  • Byrne, B. M. (1998) Structural Equation Modelling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
  • Calisir, F., & Calisir, F. (2004). The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 505-515.
  • Cho, N., & Park, S. (2001). Development of electronic commerce user-consumer satisfaction index (ECUSI) for internet shopping. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101(8), 400–405
  • Crabtree, A. (2003). Designing Collaborative Systems: A Practical Guide to Ethnography. Springer-Verlag, London.
  • Fang, X., & Holsapple, C. W. (2007). An empirical study of web site navigation structures' impacts on web site usability, Decision Support Systems, 43(2), 476-491.
  • Gulliksen, J., Boivie, I., & Goransson, B. (2006). Usability professionals--current practices and future development, Interacting with Computers, 18(4), 568-600.
  • Hattie, J. R. (1985), Methodological review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items, Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139-164.
  • Heath, C. & Luff, P. (1991). Collaborative Activity and Technological Design: Task coordination in the London Underground control room. Proceedings of ECSCW'91, (pp. 65-80). Kluwer, Amsterdam.
  • Hvannberg, E. T., Law, E. L., & Larusdottir, M. K. (2007). Heuristic evaluation: Comparing ways of finding and reporting usability problems, Interacting with Computers, 19, 2, 225-240.
  • IST@MIT. (2006). Usability Guidelines. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/is/usability/ usabilityguidelines. html on September 12, 2006.
  • Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika, 36, 109–133.
  • Junker, B. W. (1993). Conditional association, essentially independence and monotone unidimensional item response models. The Annals of Statistics, 21(3), 1359-1378.
  • Komaroff, E. (1997). Effect of simultaneous violations of essential tau-equivalence and correlated errors on coefficient alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 337–348.
  • Kowalski, M. (2002). Evaluating CMS usability: a checklist. Retrieved from http://www.kitsite.com/articles/cms-usability-checklist.html on September 23, 2006.
  • Law, K. S., & Wong, C. (1999). Multidimensional constructs in structural equation analysis: An illustration using the job perception and job satisfaction constructs. Journal of Management. 25(2), 143-160.
  • McDonald, R. P. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability Inspection Methods, Conference Companion Tutorials, CHI pp. 413-414.
  • Pereira, C.S., & Soares, A. L. (2007). Improving the quality of collaboration requirements for information management through social networks analysis, International Journal of Information Management, 27(2), 86-103.
  • Pierotti, D. (2004). Heuristic Evaluation - A System Checklist. Xerox Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.stcsig.org/usability/topics/articles/he-checklist.html on September 13, 2006.
  • Plagemann, T., Goebel, V., Mauthe, A., Mathy, L., Turletti, T., & Urvoy-Keller, G. (2006). From content distribution networks to content networks -- issues and challenges, Computer Communications, 29( 5), 551-562.
  • Preece, J. (1994). Human-computer interaction. New York: Addison- Wesley.
  • Raykov, T. (2001). Bias of coefficient a for fixed congeneric measures with correlated errors. Applied Psychological Measurements. 25(1), 69-76.
  • Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. (1988). Second order factor analysis: Some theory and applications. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 51–67.
  • Robertson, J. (2003). So, what is a content management system? KM Column, 1-4.Seethamraju R. (2004) Measurement of user-perceived web quality. Proceedings of the Twelfth European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1745-1757). Turku School of Economics and Business Administration, Turku, Finland.
  • Shneiderman, B., & Plaisant, C. (2004). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (4th ed.). USA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173-80.
  • Stout, W. F. (1987).A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait dimensionality. Psychometrika, 55, 293-325.
  • Uren, V., Cimiano, P., Iria, J., Handschuh, S., Vargas-Vera, M., Motta, E., & Ciravegna, F. (2006). Semantic annotation for knowledge management: Requirements and a survey of the state of the art, Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 4, 1, 14-28.
  • Viller, S. P., & Sommerville, I. (1999). Coherence: an approach to representing ethnographic analyses in systems design. Human-Computer Interaction. 14, 9-41.
  • Walker, C. M., Azen, R., & Schmitt, T. A. (2006). Statistical versus substantive dimensionality: The effect of distributional differences on dimensionality assessment using DIMTEST. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 721-738.
  • Weiss, E. (1994). Making Computers People-Literate. USA: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.
  • Yang, Z., Cai, S., Zhou, Z., & Zhou, N. (2005). Development and validation of an instrument to measure user perceived service quality of information presenting Web portals. Information & Management, 42(4), 575-589.
  • Yuan, K. H. (2005). Fit indices versus test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 115--148.
  • Yurdugul, H. (2007). The Effects of Different Correlation Types on Goodness-of-Fit Indices in First Order and Second Order Factor Analysis for Multiple Choice Test Data, Elementary Education Online, 6(1), 154-179.