Exploring Screen Sizes and Design of Guis Within Emergency Response Handling
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Department of Informatics Exploring screen sizes and design of GUIs within emergency response handling Linda Katrine Andresen August 14, 2013 Abstract This thesis explores two aspects of a decision support system for use during emergency situations: the design of a graphical user interface, and screen sizes. Through a user- centered design approach, these aspects are investigated based on the needs of what is referred to in this thesis as emergency leaders, which are the leaders responsible for the cooperation and coordination of an emergency response. Through evaluations of a prototype, in the form of a responsive web page, together with different sized screen, both design and device implications were derived. The research revealed five design implications which addresses the need for an interface for use by emergency leaders to be role-based, context-aware, under the control of the user, scalable in relation to the magnitude of an ER, and to require limited input. The research also revealed that for the addressed users, a large tablet had the preferred screen size. Keywords: User-centered design, emergency response, screen size, graphical user interface, emergency leader Acknowledgement First of all, I would like to thank my main supervisor Erik Gøsta Nilsson, senior scientist at SINTEF ICT, for all his guidance and support throughout this project. I would also like to thank my internal supervisor Amela Karahasanovic, research scientist at SINTEF ICT and associate professor at the Univeristy of Oslo, as well as the others at SINTEF ICT who have contributed to to the work with this thesis. I would furthermore like to thank everyone else who has contributed, especially the helpful and cooperative people from the emergency agencies who took time to participate and without whom this thesis would not have been possible. Also participating were fellow students and friends from the Institute of Informatics at the University of Oslo, who also receives thanks for taking time to participate. A special thanks goes to Christian Hochlin for the technical development of the prototype produced for this thesis. The credit for pretty much all of the produced code goes to him. The ruined CSS code, however, is my doing. Finally, I am very grateful for the support my friends and family have shown me throughout this project. Especially my beloved sister, Tonje Merete Andresen, should be mentioned both for reading the proofs and for general support. Linda Katrine Andresen University of Oslo August 2013 ii Table of contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Motivation and problem domain . .1 1.2 Objective . .2 1.3 Scope . .3 1.4 Research questions . .3 1.5 Research context: The BRIDGE-project . .4 1.6 Chapter overview . .4 2 Related work 7 3 The screen sizes included in this thesis 11 3.1 Relevant aspects about computer screens . 12 3.2 Input mechanisms . 13 3.3 The included screen sizes . 15 4 Design approach 17 4.1 About user-centered design . 17 4.2 Models compatible with user-centered design . 19 4.2.1 ISO 13407 Human-centered design processes for interactive systems 20 5 Research method 23 5.1 Background . 23 5.1.1 Triangulation . 24 5.1.2 Research design . 24 iii 5.2 Data gathering and analysis methods used for understanding the context ofuse....................................... 26 5.2.1 Interviews . 26 5.2.2 Questionnaire . 29 5.3 Data gathering and analysis done in relation to the evaluations . 33 5.3.1 Hybrid method . 33 5.3.2 Usability testing . 34 5.4 Laws and ethical considerations . 36 6 The initial data gathering and analysis 39 6.1 Interviews . 39 6.1.1 Analysis of the data gathered with the interviews . 40 6.2 Questionnaire . 41 6.2.1 Analysis of the data gathered with the questionnaire . 42 7 The context of use 45 7.1 About emergency response . 45 7.2 About emergency leaders . 49 7.3 The tasks and responsibilities of emergency leaders . 52 7.3.1 Information . 57 7.4 The equipment used today . 59 7.5 General challenges when handling an emergency response . 61 8 Requirements 65 8.1 Relevant literature on which to base requirements . 66 8.1.1 Human Factors and emergency response . 66 8.1.2 Context-adaptive interfaces . 68 8.1.3 Intuitive user interfaces . 69 8.1.4 Generic interface? . 70 8.2 Establishing requirements . 71 9 The prototype 75 9.1 About prototyping . 75 iv 9.2 Development approach: About responsive web design . 76 9.3 Design principles . 78 9.4 Presentation of the prototype . 81 10 Evaluations 89 10.1 Hybrid method . 89 10.1.1 Analysis of the data gathered with the hybrid method . 91 10.2 Usability testing . 92 10.2.1 Analysis of the data gathered in the usability testing . 94 11 Results 97 11.1 Hybrid method . 97 11.1.1 Design aspects . 97 11.1.2 Device aspects . 101 11.1.3 Other use aspects . 102 11.2 Usability testing . 103 11.2.1 Findings from the quantitative part of the analysis . 103 11.2.2 Findings from the qualitative part of the analysis . 107 12 Discussion 109 12.1 Design implications . 109 12.1.1 Adjust the interface to the user: Role-based functionality . 110 12.1.2 Adjust the interface to the users context: Context-adaptive interface111 12.1.3 Limit the input: Provide information directly and limit the data requirements . 113 12.1.4 Provide control to the user: Filter out unwanted information . 114 12.1.5 Scalability: Using the interface regardless of the magnitude of an emergency response . 115 12.1.6 General thoughts about design . 116 12.2 Device implications . 117 12.2.1 Screen sizes . 117 12.2.2 Other device implications . 120 v 12.3 Reflections about the combination of screen sizes and design . 121 12.4 Limitations . 122 13 Conclusion and further work 125 13.1 Summary . 125 13.2 Contribution . 126 13.3 Further work . 127 A Translations 139 B Participation information sheet 141 C The interview guide used in the initial interviews 147 D The questionnaire 151 E Summary of the first interview 159 F Transcript of the first interview 163 G Summary of the second interview 181 H Transcript of the second interview 185 I Summary of the third interview 211 J Transcript of the third interview 215 K Results of the qualitative analysis of the interviews 231 L Analysis of the data gathered with the questionnaire 233 M Persona 245 N Screenshots of the prototype 247 O The guide used in the evaluation with the hybrid method 251 vi P The guide used in the usability testing 255 Q The data foundation for the quantitative analysis of the user tests 259 vii viii List of Figures 4.1 The ISO 13407 lifecycle model . 21 7.1 Local command post (LCP) in relation to the operational area . 48 7.2 The tasks of the different agencies . 53 7.3 Information flow in and out of the local command post . 55 9.1 The aspects of mental models. 79 9.2 Screenshots of the map as displayed in the prototype. 84 9.3 Screenshots of the ’photoalbum’ displayed in the prototype . 86 9.4 Screenshots of how a selceted photo is displayed in the prototype . 87 10.1 Picture of the included devices with the developed prototype . 91 N.1 Screenshots of a dialog box as displayed in the prototype . 248 N.2 Screenshots of a dialog box as displayed in the prototype . 249 N.3 Screenshots of a dialog box as displayed in the prototype . 250 ix x List of Tables 3.1 Specifications of different sized screens . 14 3.2 The devices included in this thesis . 16 11.1 Task completion and errors made with the mobile phone. 104 11.2 Task completion and errors made with the small tablet. 105 11.3 Task completion and errors made with the large tablet. 105 11.4 Task completion and errors made with the laptop. 106 xi Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation and problem domain Several emergency situations require the joint effort of all the emergency agencies, especially when a situation regards an incident of a larger magnitude. The Åsta accident, the Scandinavian Star accident, and the terror attacks in Oslo and at Utøya the 22. of July 2011, are examples of larger incidents which demanded the joint efforts of a large force of emergency workers from different agencies. These incidents all happened suddenly and they were complex, involving explosions and/or fires, several victims, time pressure, etc. In dealing with situations like these, efficient cooperation and coordination both within and between the emergency agencies are of the utmost importance, as misunderstandings and other issues can have serious consequences within this domain. There are several examples that illustrate the effect of poor cooperation and coordination, due to one factor or another. In relation to the terror attacks at Utøya for example, misunderstandings regarding the joint meeting point for two of the agencies and the resulting delayed response not only illustrate how time critical an emergency response is, but also how difficult and prone to errors it is to cooperate and coordinate with the practices used today. Managing a joint response is as such a complex and important issue. There is however little or no support for this today in the form of IT-equipment when working in the field. Even though technology, and especially mobile devices like smartphones and 1 tablets, are increasingly being used within both other work domains as well as in our everyday lives, the implementation of new technology within emergency response in Norway has been comparatively slow.