Lessons learned from evaluating a mobile app out in the field

In an ideal world every application, web page or system developed would undergo an iterative series of interface and usability evaluations. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and often limited testing occurs. Coupled with this is the rapid development of mobile applications for use in many areas. Often these are developed very quickly and, given consideration when developing this type of device, care needs to be taken in evaluating them at each stage. This paper reflects on the lessons learned from only carrying out a user evaluation and no interface evaluation of a mobile application developed for use by soil scientists in the field. The application, provisionally named iPed (Information for Profile Description), was developed in response to the need for an easy and effective method for entering data in the field which would eliminate the requirement of taking many references book and also remove double handling of data entry. A combination of in-lab and in-field evaluations were undertaken to test the effectiveness of this method of data entry with soil science students in the natural environment of a soil pit. Despite the effects of the weather on the readability of the screen, preliminary evidence suggests that participants much preferred the mobile method to the traditional paper based method. However, several interface problems discovered in this evaluation may have been able to be remedied had an interface evaluation been carried out prior to the user evaluation. The resulting lessons learned from the evaluation carried on iPed highlight the benefits of expert evaluations undertaken during development and that, generally users are resilient and will “make do” if required.