Qu, T (2006) The usability of graphical user interfaces of mobile computing devices designed for construction foremen: Icons and pre-defined text lists compared. PhD thesis, University of Florida, USA.
Abstract
Field documentation by construction foremen traditionally has been done through the use of pen and paper. The drawbacks of the traditional method and the need to computerize the field documentation process have long been recognized by researchers of construction management. Mobile computing devices provide an excellent hardware platform for addressing this need. Unfortunately, the past research efforts and technological developments in this area have not provided solutions with good usability. This study examined past research from a usability point of view and focused on the graphical user interface usability aspect of the problem. The inefficiency associated with the data input method though stylus and touch sensitive screen was examined. The focus of the study was on construction foremen, but other participants in the construction industry were also included as a basis of comparison. The study investigated the experience of the research participants with computers, personal digital assistants (PDA's) and other touch sensitive screen devices. The study evaluated the usability properties of icons and pre-determined text lists as potential candidates for automated data entry on mobile computing devices in the construction field. The views of participants on the standardization of the content of the field documentation, importance of quick data entry in the field, and the inefficiency associated with a stylus writing data input method were explored. Thirty-five construction foremen employed by sitework contractors, 37 construction professionals, and 28 university students were selected to complete a specially designed computer visual search game that consisted of an icon visual search interface and a text visual search interface. Each subject completed 14 visual search tasks in each interface. Results showed foremen and construction professionals performed visual search tasks faster with icons than with pre-determined text lists. Study results also showed comparable levels of accuracy of data input and also good satisfaction ratings when using the icon interface when compared with the text interface. The results also suggested a strong positive correlation between the task completion time and task errors (fewer errors when task times were short). A strong negative correlation was noted between the construction experience of the research participant and the task errors; i.e., participants with less experience made more errors.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Hinze, J W and Hasell, M J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; computing; documentation; standardization; professional |
| Index terms: | accuracy, documentation, usability, user interface, computing, completion time, satisfaction rating, university student, platform, mobile computing, hardware, construction professional, standardization, construction industry |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, digital design, professional development, project controls, human-computer interaction, industry analysis, user-centered design, computing systems, computer hardware, curriculum design, digital technology, project delivery |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Education, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Time Control, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here