Browsing by Subject "heuristics"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Engagement and Usability of a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Mobile App Compared With Web-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Among College Students: Randomized Heuristic Trial
    (JMIR, 2020) Purkayastha, Saptarshi; Addepally, Siva Abhishek; Bucher, Sherri; BioHealth Informatics, School of Informatics and Computing
    Background: Recent evidence in mobile health has demonstrated that, in some cases, apps are an effective way to improve health care delivery. Health care interventions delivered via mobile technology have demonstrated both practicality and affordability. Lately, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions delivered over the internet have also shown a meaningful impact on patients with anxiety and depression. Objective: Given the growing proliferation of smartphones and the trust in apps to support improved health behaviors and outcomes, we were interested in comparing a mobile app with Web-based methods for the delivery of CBT. This study aimed to compare the usability of a CBT mobile app called MoodTrainer with an evidence-based website called MoodGYM. Methods: We used convenience sampling to recruit 30 students from a large Midwestern university and randomly assigned them to either the MoodGYM or MoodTrainer user group. The trial period ran for 2 weeks, after which the students completed a self-assessment survey based on Nielsen heuristics. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the survey results from the 2 groups. We also compared the number of modules attempted or completed and the time spent on CBT strategies. Results: The results indicate that the MoodTrainer app received a higher usability score when compared with MoodGYM. Overall, 87% (13/15) of the participants felt that it was easy to navigate through the MoodTrainer app compared with 80% (12/15) of the MoodGYM participants. All MoodTrainer participants agreed that the app was easy to use and did not require any external assistance, whereas only 67% (10/15) had the same opinion for MoodGYM. Furthermore, 67% (10/15) of the MoodTrainer participants found that the navigation controls were easy to locate compared with 80% (12/15) of the MoodGYM participants. MoodTrainer users, on average, completed 2.5 modules compared with 1 module completed by MoodGYM users. Conclusions: As among the first studies to directly compare the usability of a mobile app–based CBT with smartphone-specific features against a Web-based CBT, there is an opportunity for app-based CBT as, at least in our limited trial, it was more usable and engaging. The study was limited to evaluate usability only and not the clinical effectiveness of the app.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Heuristics and Biases in the Intuitive Projection of Retail Sales
    (1987-08) Cox, Anthony D.; Summers, John O.
    Retail merchandise buyers are shown to exhibit a nonregressive bias when making sales projections. A quantitative model based on the principle of statistical regression is found to outperform the judgmental sales predictions of experienced buyers. Implications for the appropriate roles of intuitive and model-based decision making in retail merchandise buying are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Systematic Heuristic Evaluation of Computerized Consultation Order Templates: Clinicians’ and Human Factors Engineers’ Perspectives
    (Springer, 2017-08) Savoy, April; Patel, Himalaya; Flanagan, Mindy E.; Weiner, Michael; Russ, Alissa L.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    We assessed the usability of consultation order templates and identified problems to prioritize in design efforts for improving referral communication. With a sample of 26 consultation order templates, three evaluators performed a usability heuristic evaluation. The evaluation used 14 domain-independent heuristics and the following three supplemental references: 1 new domain-specific heuristic, 6 usability goals, and coded clinicians’ statements regarding ease of use for 10 sampled templates. Evaluators found 201 violations, a mean of 7.7 violations per template. Minor violations outnumbered major violations almost twofold, 115 (57%) to 62 (31%). Approximately 68% of violations were linked to 5 heuristics: aesthetic and minimalist design (17%), error prevention (16%), consistency and standards (14%), recognition rather than recall (11%), and meet referrers’ information needs (10%). Severe violations were attributed mostly to meet referrers’ information needs and recognition rather than recall. Recorded violations yielded potential negative consequences for efficiency, effectiveness, safety, learnability, and utility. Evaluators and clinicians demonstrated 80% agreement in usability assessment. Based on frequency and severity of usability heuristic violations, the consultation order templates reviewed may impede clinical efficiency and risk patient safety. Results support the following design considerations: communicate consultants’ requirements, facilitate information seeking, and support communication. While the most frequent heuristic violations involved interaction design and presentation, the most severe violations lacked information desired by referring clinicians. Violations related to templates’ inability to support referring clinicians’ information needs had the greatest potential negative impact on efficiency and safety usability goals. Heuristics should be prioritized in future design efforts.