Research Methodology for User Evaluation Dissertation

Research Methodology for User Evaluation - Dissertation Example Scenario 4: Fourth scenario involves making changes in the personal settings of the user to protect his personal infroamtion and to enhance the level of privacy from any undesired source. Changes may also be made to alter the settings for font type, color schemes, languages etc. Scenario 5: This scenario involves the usage of the system on an alternate technology and platform to analyze the level of compatibility with multiple environments. A video has been designed to provide a means for visual recollection of all the processes and functions of the system. It is common for people to understand computer operations in a better manner if visual step-by-step tutorials are available. The video shall be made available in both Arabic and English languages. 9.1.1 Profiling of exemplar UbIAMS The preceding chapter explains the models that form the basis of the development of UbIAMS. The addition of the word ‘ubiquitous’ has transformed the conventional concept of being constrain ed at one place to being available in different spaces; this introduction enhances the application to physical, as well as virtual spaces. UbIAMS has been designed on the basis of multiple models, including, architectural model, behavioural model, interaction diagram, collaboration diagram, sequence diagram and state machine diagram. The three criteria, security and identity, accessibility and acceptability, usability and user experience have been highlighted in the architectural model to ensure the inclusion of a diverse range of properties in the end product. The behavioural model has been developed for UbIAMS to highlight the basic operation of the system. Collaboration and interaction diagram can help the user evaluate the complexity and usefulness of the operations. State machine and... Research Methodology for User Evaluation The formulation of the considerations for the development of the prototype has been discussed in this chapter, alongside the scenarios that shall prove to facilitate the functionality of the system for the users. The scenarios also provide a full insight into the system and the scope of its functions before even operating it. This chapter also described the process and design of the survey which is an important step in the acquisition of feedback from the users. Different age groups and types of users (varying levels of experiences and diverse degrees of disabilities) have been chosen to ensure that the end product proves to be flexible for all ages and user groups. Developers often develop systems without considering the probable elementary computer skills of users therefore this factors has been given careful consideration in the designing of this system. This chapter also highlights the ethical considerations that have been undertaken in the processes of acquiriung feedback from the users. Their willingness to participate in the study and eagerness to protect their information have been kept as top priorities. The users that have been chosen for the research study have been limited to the land of Saudi Arab to reflect a true image of the level of acceptance that can be expected from the region after its eventual launch. The next chapter shall include details regarding â€Å"Statistical Tools and Data Analysis Approaches†.

LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Essay

LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - Essay Example In this regard, a private nuisance refers to the violation of another person’s quite enjoyment of his/her property while public nuisance is simply any interference with the safety, health, convenience and peace of the members of public. It is however worth noting that according to the British laws, an act of nuisance or trespass can only be dealt with through the civil legal routes such as suing the offending party and can not amount to prosecution. The UK statutes dealing with both private and public nuisances are require evidence of justifiable proof that the nuisances are unreasonable and are affecting the rights of either the private homeowners or the ordinary citizens to enjoy their privileges. This is because both offences are considered as civil offences rather than criminal offences. This paper uses the case of David’s Family and Harrington & Nephew limited to highlight the cases of private nuisance, public nuisance and trespass in their relationship as well as discuss the potential remedies and defences that both parties may have under the British laws. Private nuisance There are a number of events in the scenario between David’s Family and Harrington & Nephew limited (Factory) that may constitute private nuisances. For example various factory operations such as the movement of Wagons are causing unreasonable noise that is affecting David and his family to lose their sleep during the night. On the other hand, the death of Rose tree belonging to Mr. and Mrs. David is directly as a result of the dust coming from the Harrington & Nephew Limited factory premises. According to most of the UK statutes regarding the definitions of private nuisance, all these cases are considered private nuisances to David’s family because they have cause interference with their right to enjoy their property by invading their private lives with undesirable noise and dust. On the other hand, If David’s family decides to sue the factory belongi ng to Harrington & Nephew Limited for the private nuisance that their operations have caused to their family lives and property, the relevant local authorities handling the case will have to decide whether the interference by the factory operations have resulted in unreasonable damage to property. In this context, any evidence of physical damage such as the death of the Rose plant will make it easier to justify their case against the factory1. With regard to whether the factory operations have interfered with the rights of David’s family to quite enjoyment of their property, the claimant will be required to prove the cases of substantial and unreasonable interference with his family’s enjoyment. For example the fact that David and his family members are suffering from a continual loss of sleep due to the excessive noise from the factory can be used by the claimant to justify that the interference by the factory is unreasonable. The law will however balance between the right of the defendant (Harrington & Nephew Limited) to use their property and the right of David’s family (Claimant) not to be unreasonably inconvenienced. It is also worth noting that not all interference are considered to be nuisances according to the UK laws and sometimes individuals may be required to tolerate a given degree of