Heuristic Evaluation 1

Heuristic Evaluation on Track Changes tool in Microsoft Word 2007

Lim Zhen Ling Samantha

Nanyang Technological University

 Heuristic Evaluation 2

1. Brief introduction

The Track Changes tool in Microsoft Word 2007 helps users to easily view and track
changes and comments while you work in a document. I have not used this tool before in
Word 2007. I frequently use Word 2007 for typing essays and reports, accessing this program
on a daily basis. However, I usually perform functions that can be found on the “home”,
“insert” and “page layout” tabs and rarely access the four remaining tabs. Thus, I believe I am
familiar with around 50% of Word 2007’s functions and tools. In terms of editing, I usually
rely on the Word 2007’s autocorrect function, spelling and grammar checking and marking as
well as its dictionary – which is essentially Word 2007’s default options. The computers I
interact with on a daily basis are those in the school’s computer labs and my laptop which
operate on Windows platform. According to Nielson, “novice evaluators” are people who
have general knowledge about computers; “single specialists” have usability expertise;
“double specialists” have usability and Word 2007 expertise. Therefore, based on Nielson’s
definition and my personal experience, I rate myself as a novice evaluator.

2. Violations found

Task Part 1: Type in a paragraph of text, save it, and then turn on Track Changes. Then make
a few tracked, highlighted edits to your document.

1. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] The interface’s help documentation refers to Track
Changes tool as “change tracking” while the relevant icon in the Review tab is
labelled “track changes”. Inconsistent terminology results in user confusion.

2. [H2-10 Help and documentation] Differences in terminology diminish the value of

‘help’ in usage of Track Changes.

3. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] A unique Track Changes icon appears beside Track
Changes option when it is selected (Fig. 1.1). Activation of other functions in the
interface results in appearance of a Tick icon instead (Fig. 1.2).

4. [H2-8 Aesthetic and minimalist design] A unique icon to indicate activation of Track
Changes is unnecessary when a simple uncluttered Tick icon would suffice.
Additional details in the unique icon compete with critical features, decreasing their
salience and thus their value as an activation icon.

5. [H2-10 Help and documentation] Instruction for adding Track Changes to status bar
on top left corner is incorrect. Right clicking on status bar only allows access to
options to “Restore”, “Minimize” and “Close” the status bar. The correct instruction is
to click on arrow down icon for access to status bar options. Incorrect documentation
causes users to execute incorrect action sequences and reach dead ends, defeating the
purpose of help documentation.
 Heuristic Evaluation 3

6. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] The icon for track changes on Review tab (Fig. 1.3)
is different from the one on the status bar (Fig. 1.4). It is important for them to be
consistent especially when they are detailed icons – minimal deviations would cause
major problems in identifying and relating them as representing track changes.

7. [H2-8 Aesthetic and minimalist design] Instead of highlighting thus enhance visibility
of Track Changes icon, addition of * sign (Fig. 1.4) competes with visibility of its
critical features, diminishing its relative visibility. This is severe since the icon is very
small.

8. [H2-6 Recognition rather than recall] Irrelevant features in the Track Changes
refinement decreases the ease and speed where it can be recognized by users.

9. [H2-2 Match between system and real world] Like the real world, insertions are made
to indicate changes in tenses i.e. addition of a‘s’ (Fig. 1.5). However, it is not so for
insertions that changes the root word (Fig. 1.6). As users transfer real world
knowledge to the interface while editing, this mismatch may cause errors and
reduction in efficiency.

10. [H2-2 Match between system and the real world] The edit highlights persists despite
changing an edited word back to its original word. Interface cannot recognise that it is
the same word unlike a human editor. This mismatch may cause user confusion and
errors in editing.

11. [H2-6 Recognition rather than recall] Deletion of a word the first time causes it to be
struck out. However, when edited the second time, the word is deleted instead. This
inconsistency is problematic as neither is the various editing attempts recorded nor
memory aids regarding edits provided by interface. Users need to recall what they are,
causing unnecessary cognitive load.

12. [H2-7 Flexibility and efficiency of use] Undoing an edit occurs by character instead
of by word, resulting in action reversal being a cumbersome inefficient process.

13. [H2-3 User control and freedom] No options are available for changing undo to focus
on word instead of character, forcing the user to accept an inefficient procedure.

14. [H2-2 Match between system and the real world] This puzzles users as correcting
mistakes in editing can be done by word, phrase or expression in the real world.

Task Part 2: Change the colour that your edits are highlighted in.

15. [H2-8 Aesthetic and minimalist design] Too many change option information are
displayed at one time (Fig. 2.1). Competing information reduces the visibility of
change option users are searching for, increasing search time and decreasing ease of
user customization.
 Heuristic Evaluation 4

16. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] Other pop up dialogue boxes in Word 2007 adopt
usage of tabs so that only relevant information will be displayed at one time. This
should be adopted for track changes options as well.

17. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] When changing colour of text, highlights and even
pictures, users can do so via the tabs tool bar above the document. However, they
have to be done via a dialogue box for Track Changes. Users’ attempts to do so via
the former method are met with dead ends, causing frustration.

18. [H2-7 Flexibility and efficiency of use] Change options should be allowed via direct
manipulation i.e. clicking or right clicking the text. Shortcuts, similar to that of text
and picture options, should be available.

19. [H2-3 User control and freedom] The interface forces users to use the dialog box for
change options, which is an extended action sequence. They should be allowed to
make changes via alternative ways, accommodating user differences.

20. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] Different shades of a colour by terms “light” and
“dark” in other parts of the interface and in other items of the colour list (Fig. 2.1).
However, the interface refers to shades of grey in percentage terms instead (Fig. 2.1).
Inconsistency increases processing time and thereby reducing efficiency.

21. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] Instead of “default” the interface uses the term “By
author” which causes user confusion (Fig. 2.1), decreasing user understanding of
Change Tracking options and reducing ease of user customization.

22. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] Printing options for track changes are within
Change Tracking options dialogue box instead of Print options (Fig. 2.1). This
inconsistency in categorization may cause user difficulty in finding the option.

23. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] Instead of familiar terminology, Track Changes
printing options are labelled “auto”, “preserve” and “force landscape” (Fig. 2.1). This
causes difficulty in user understanding and decreases ease in option selection.

24. [H2-3 User control and freedom] Modification of the ‘auto’ format for track changes
printing options is unavailable, forcing users to accept whatever features it contains
without adequate understanding.

Task Part 3: Explore the toolbar associated with Track Changes and use it to “accept” the
changes you have made

25. [H2-4 Consistency and standards] “Accept Changes” activation icon has additional
features that make it inconsistent from the usual tick icon, increasing time needed to
process and understand the refinement.

26. [H2-8 Aesthetic and minimalist design] Additional details in the “Accept Changes”
activation icon obscure visibility off critical feature (“tick”).
 Heuristic Evaluation 5

27. [H2- 5 Error prevention] Spelling and grammar error mark-ups should have appeared
before Track Changes were accepted. Errors were allowed to be made during tracking
without any prompt from the interface.

28. [H2-3 User control and freedom] Undo function in the interface does not support
undoing of “Accept All Changes”, forcing user to click on the “Reject” icon to
“Reject All Changes In Document”

29. [H2-9 Help users recognize, diagnose and recover from errors] “Reject All Changes
in Document” did not recover previous Track Changes mark-ups. Interface does not
prompt mark-ups recovery. Alternative viewing modes (Fig. 3.1) also do not display
previous mark-ups. Users meet with a dead end.

30. [H2-10 Help and documentation] Search function in “Help” is insensitive – search
results for ‘recover track changes’ only include how to use track changes, how to turn
it on or off and how to remove it. It has no value to error recovery.

31. [H2-1 Visibility of system status] Help demo video “Video: Use Track Changes in
Word 2007 (HP Learning center)” sports an Adobe Captivate progress bar which
remained stationary for more than 5 seconds. Attempt to provide system feedback was
not made within reasonable time. System status becomes invisible to users.

32. [H2-1 Visibility of system status] No feedback from the information “i” icon in the
video dialog box. Error recovery is difficult.

33. [H2-3 User control and freedom] No options were available for the reloading of the
video, forcing users to close the dialog box and restart the action sequence.

34. [H2-3 User control and freedom] Removing Track Changes function from one
document’s Status bar causes it to be removed from all other Word documents which
are open. User customization not possible, forcing users to either have the icon on all
of its documents’ status bar or none.

35. [H2-8 Aesthetic and minimalist design] The option under the drop down menu of
“Balloons” icon – “Show All Revisions Inline” is the same as not “Showing
Revisions in Balloons” thus rendering the former option redundant. Providence of
both options results in inconsistency which leads to user frustration and lack of ease in
interface usage.

3. Summary of violations

H2 Usability heuristics Number of Violations

1 Visibility of system status 2
2 Match between system and the real world 3
3 User control and freedom 6
4 Consistency and standards 10
5 Error prevention 1
6 Recognition rather than recall 2
 Heuristic Evaluation 6

7 Flexibility and efficiency of use 2

8 Aesthetic and minimalist design 5
9 Help users recognize, diagnose and recover from 1
errors
10 Help and documentation 3
Total number of Violations 35

Overall, user interaction with the Track Changes tool in Word 2007 could have been
better. Majority of the problems (10 out of 35) identified violate the consistency and
standards heuristic, user control and freedom heuristic (6 out of 35) and aesthetic and
minimalist design (5 out of 35).

4. Recommendations

It was found that many of the icons and function buttons associated to Track Changes
are inconsistent amongst each other and with regard to other buttons in the interface. This
is because the interface designer seems to be uncertain of which features are critical for
user recognition thus included more than necessary. My recommendation is to further
refine existing refinements and allow them to be consistent amongst each other. For
instance, all icons related to Track Changes (function buttons on tool bar and status bar)
sport the same critical features which are the red mark-ups contrasting the grey lines
representing text on a folded sheet of paper. If the designer wish to highlight the visibility
of the icon on the status bar, blinking light or a bright background colour can be used
instead of an * sign. In addition, activation icons can be refined and made consistent with
other activation icons in the interface. Instead of the complex unique icon with an * sign,
simple ticks in orange highlighted boxes can be used (Fig. 1.2). Refining these
refinements would aid in reducing user memory load, increasing the usage of recognition
over recall in the interface and improve the interface’s aesthetic quality and minimalist
design.

Track Changes is essentially the computer version of a human editor – allowing

editing to be done in software, in a neater way. Therefore, it is important especially for
new users of this tool, that there is a match between system and the real world so as to
allow transfer of real world knowledge and savings in relearning. The interface should
take advantage of its built-in dictionary to identify root words. Insertions with regard to
changes in form of a root word can be allowed by character however for insertions that
changes the root word – the original word should be struck out (deleted) and the new
word should be printed on the side. Although reversible actions are allowed i.e. undoing
an insertion, it can only be done character by character which is not only tedious but
unintuitive as re-editing can be done by word or phrase in the real world. My
recommendation is that the interface should allow users to customize – options for
undoing an edit by character or by word. This will allow more user control and freedom,
increase efficiency of use and decrease the gap between interface and real world.
 Heuristic Evaluation 7

As Track Changes is a less commonly used tool in Word 2007, it is important that its
usability is consistent with more commonly used tools and functions in the interface. My
recommendation is that shortcuts available to other editing functions in the interface
should be available to Track Changes as well. For instance, users should be able to edit
Track Changes options via direct manipulation i.e. right click and double click; option
buttons should appear on the tool bar above document. This will enhance efficiency and
intuitiveness of option modification task. Users should be able to undo changes accepted
via the general undo button at the status bar as well as users are more familiar with that
button. There need not be two different buttons for reversible actions. In addition,
categorization of functions should be compatible with rest of the interface. Options for
printing documents which use track changes should still be categorized under print
options and not within Track Changes. Inconsistency causes function to be hidden from
users.

The interface should be able to anticipate users’ tasks and problems and help prevent
them or aid users in recovering from them. One way it can do so is via its help and
documentation. Firstly, its search should be sensitive as users who approach it usually
already attempted to reduce their gulf of execution or evaluation via trial-and-error.
Failure to find help in search results will lead to greater frustration and helplessness.
Secondly, the hyperlinks to online help resources should be frequently checked and
updated to prevent users from encountering dead links thus dead ends. Terminology used
in the documentation should be consistent with that of the interface so that users know
what the instructions are referring to. Mistakes in instructions should be rectified
immediately. Secondly, all actions should be reversible and previous work should be
accessible. When users try to reject all changes accepted previously, system should
understand that users may be trying to recover mark-ups and provide a system prompt –
allow alternative action to be available. Thirdly, reminders to previous edits should be
available – struck out instead of deleted permanently. This is consistent with the real
world and the 1st edit attempt.
 Heuristic Evaluation 8

Annexe

Fig. 1.1

Fig. 1.2

Fig. 1.3

Fig. 1.4

Fig. 1.5

Fig. 1.6
 Heuristic Evaluation 9

Fig. 2.1

Fig. 3.1

Fig. 3.2
Heuristic Evaluation 10
Heuristic Evaluation 11