Synchronous remote usability studies can be a convenient and cost-effective alternative to conventional local usability studies. Although they are common in the field, there has been little research comparing synchronous remote usability studies with local studies. In our comparison of remote and local studies of an expert interface, the primary differences were in the participant's and facilitator's qualitative experience. The remote and local studies agreed closely (with no significant differences) in terms of the number of usability issues found, their type, and their severity. While our comparison focuses on an expert interface and more work is needed to understand remote studies in general, our experience suggests that evaluators of expert interfaces will have comparable success identifying usability issues with either remote or local studies.
['A. J. Bernheim Brush', 'Morgan G. Ames', 'Janet Davis']
A comparison of synchronous remote and local usability studies for an expert interface