JP2003307441A - Behavior analyzer for evaluation of operability - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To solve the problem that the results of an evaluation depend upon psychology of an operator of a device or that of a person who is evaluating, furthermore the evaluation or analysis of the results needs a vast of labor, time and dedicated knowledge. <P>SOLUTION: The behavior of the operator under test is taken with a video, it is reproduced in a video reproducing part, and an operation time or the number of malfunctions is inputted in an input part by a manual operation or a sensor, and contents of the experiment for the evaluation of operability is analyzed in an analysis operation part. The results of the analysis are quantified and output on a display part. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2004,JPO

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation in equipment operability evaluation experiments.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art There are various kinds of equipment around us, that is, equipment having a wide variety of functions, and by using these kinds of equipment, we carry our daily lives and office work. For example, there are a wide variety of printers, mobile phones, and PCs that can be used by connecting to a PC.When these devices cannot be used, they are used so frequently that they interfere with daily life and office work. It is a must-have item. Therefore, it is an indispensable condition for a user who uses equipment to be able to comfortably operate the equipment in order to enjoy daily life and office work comfortably. However, the functions of recent devices have become remarkably multifunctional, and it has become difficult for users to understand how to operate all the devices. Therefore, the manufacturer designing the equipment can easily understand the operation method,
That is, it has become necessary to design products with good operability. Therefore, manufacturers providing equipment can accurately and promptly evaluate the operability of products under development and manufactured products, and feed back the evaluation results to subsequent improvements and development, that is, the operability evaluation results to subsequent products. Reflecting it in the design process is inevitably a work required for product design,
It is an important part of product development.

In the following, an evaluator who is a side of the operability evaluation experiment will evaluate the conventional operability evaluation and analysis method.
An example will be described in which a test operator, who is the subject of the experiment, performs an operability experiment. In the conventional operability evaluation and analysis methods, the evaluator investigates and determines the impression after the operation of the test operator who operates various devices, that is, the feeling of operation, using oral questions and questionnaires. In addition, the evaluator observed the test operator and decided the operability by the evaluator's arbitrary judgment. For example, the evaluator uses an interview method that verifies the impression of the operation to the test operator, or a form that lists the questions created by the evaluator after the experiment, that is, a questionnaire. A typical example is a method of investigating feelings. There is also a operability evaluation method in which the state of the test operator during the operability evaluation experiment is recorded as an image on a video camera and then analyzed on a VCR.

[0004]

However, the conventional technique as described above has the following problems.

First, the operation feeling of the test operator has a drawback that the result depends on how the test operator feels when asked a question, that is, the psychological state of the test operator.

Secondly, there is a serious problem that the evaluation result is conveniently interpreted and influenced by the evaluator's psychological state and prejudice.

Thirdly, this evaluation and analysis method is very complicated and has a drawback that it takes a lot of time to process data.

Fourthly, there is a drawback that expert knowledge is required for evaluation and analysis of the result.

Fifthly, in the method of observing and evaluating the behavior of the operator under test, the time during which the operator under test operates the equipment to be evaluated is measured. There is a serious drawback that it is difficult to judge the superiority or inferiority of the operability when the operating time and the like conflict.

Sixth, in the operability evaluation method using a VCR, it is troublesome to reproduce a video image of a test operator,
Since the evaluator manually analyzes the evaluation result, there are drawbacks that the validity of the evaluation result is lowered due to entry errors and the time and labor costs are enormous.

The present invention has been made in order to solve the above-mentioned problems of the prior art, and its purpose is to:
Judgment does not depend on prejudice such as the psychological state and prejudice of the evaluator, the evaluation and analysis are complicated and do not take a lot of time, and the operation when the time to operate between the devices to be evaluated conflicts An object of the present invention is to provide a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation, which allows an evaluator who does not have any specialized knowledge to evaluate the operability without being hard to judge sex.

[0012]

In order to achieve the above object, the following inventions are provided.

One aspect of the operability-evaluating behavior analysis apparatus of the present invention is a operability evaluation experiment of a device, in which a video reproducing section for recording and reproducing an operation video of a test operator and a recording from the video reproducing section are measured. The input section that automatically or manually inputs the information to be used as the data of the operability evaluation item, the analysis calculation section that automatically aggregates and analyzes the operability evaluation item data input from the input section, and the analysis calculation section. And a display unit for displaying the analysis result, and the analysis operation unit quantifies the level of operability with a combination of specific functional expressions and calculates the result as an analysis result. It is a device.

By quantifying the operability level of the device in this manner, it is effective to grasp the superiority or inferiority of each evaluation item such as a large number of evaluated shapes and samples.

In another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for operability evaluation of the present invention, the input section automatically sets information detected by a sensor attached to the device to be evaluated in at least one item of operability evaluation items. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation characterized by inputting.

Since the data detected by the sensor is automatically input and recorded, it is possible to collect the data in which the human variation among the evaluators is remarkably reduced. Collecting accurate input data is effective for obtaining more accurate analysis results.

In another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for operability evaluation of the present invention, the video reproducing section reproduces the operation video of the test operator a plurality of times, and the measured information is at least one of the operability evaluation items. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation characterized by the following.

Thus, the operation video of the test operator recorded during the operability evaluation experiment can be reproduced a plurality of times, so that even a non-specialist can easily perform the measurement. By dividing each evaluation item, it is effective for fine-grained evaluation from various viewpoints, and the evaluator can also grasp the superiority or inferiority of the operability evaluation item.

Another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for operability evaluation of the present invention is that the input section has an observation time Ob for observing without touching the equipment to be evaluated and an operation for touching and operating the equipment to be evaluated. The execution time Ex is input, the analysis calculation unit calculates the total operation time OT = Ob + Ex for the device to be evaluated, and the display unit quantitatively displays OT as the operability evaluation score. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation.

Thus, in the operability evaluation experiment, it is possible to judge that the shorter the variation is, the higher the operability is by paying attention to the observation operator's observation time and the operation execution time.

According to another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the input unit is the time Es at which the test operator starts the experiment.
And the time Os at which the test operator first touches a specific part of the device to be evaluated and the time Oe at which the test operator completes the operation, and the analysis operation unit inputs the total operation time OT to the device to be evaluated.
= Oe−Es, observation time Ob = Os−Es, operation execution time Ex
= Oe−Os, and the display unit is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation, characterized in that Ex is quantitatively displayed as an operability evaluation score.

Thus, paying attention to the length and variation in the operation execution time of the test operator, it can be determined that the shorter the variation is, the higher the operability is.

Another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention is characterized in that the input section inputs the number of malfunctions Er1 in which an improper operation is performed on an evaluation target portion of the device to be evaluated. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation.

Another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention is characterized in that the input section inputs the number of malfunctions Er2 in which an inappropriate operation is performed on a part other than the evaluation target part of the device to be evaluated. Is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation.

According to the above two modes, the number of malfunctions of the test operator is recorded by summing up the measured Er1 and Er2 in the analysis calculation unit, and the result is displayed in the display unit on this device. Can be displayed so that the operability of the evaluated device can be grasped quantitatively and visually. Further, it is determined that the operability of the device to be evaluated is lower as the number of malfunctions is larger, and the evaluation target part or the part other than the evaluation target part is divided in advance, which makes it easy to take measures such as improvement for the device to be evaluated.

According to another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the input unit performs a correct operation form based on an experiment result of a plurality of times or a plurality of persons (a result of an operation form of n times or n persons). The number of times or the number of people c was input, and the analysis calculation unit causes the test operator to operate the device under evaluation in the correct operation mode assumed by the designer.
The behavior analysis device for operability evaluation is characterized by calculating c / n and quantitatively displaying Op as the operability evaluation score.

According to this, the evaluator has good operability if the probability of performing an appropriate operation form with respect to the structure and movement direction of the device is high, that is, if the operation form accuracy rate Op = c / n is high, the evaluator operates. It is possible to easily judge that the sex is good.

In another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the input section includes the observation time Ob, the operation execution time Ex, the operation form correct answer rate Op, the number of malfunctions Er1 to the evaluation target portion, and the evaluation target portion. In addition to the number of malfunctions Er2, the number of times the test operator peeked at the device under evaluation Pt, the number of times the test operator spoke, the number of utterances St, and the number of times the test operator's facial expression changed. The number of facial expression changes Et and the weighting factors m ₁ , m ₂ , m ₃ , m ₄ , m ₅ , m ₆ , of the operability evaluation items,
m ₇ and m ₈ are input, and the analytic calculation unit is: m ₁ Ob + m ₂ Ex + m ₃ (1-Op) + m ₄ Er1 + m ₅ Er2 + m ₆ Pt
In calculating the operability evaluation score using the functional expression of + m ₇ St + m ₈ Et, the values of m ₁ , m ₂ , m ₃ , m ₄ , m ₅ , m ₆ , m ₇ , and m ₈ are evaluated. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation, which can be freely set by a person.

According to this, the operability is evaluated by comparing the operability evaluation scores of a plurality of devices or parts of the device,
You will be able to analyze and compare. The weighting coefficient can be freely set depending on the item that the evaluator wants to emphasize. For example, if it is desired to prioritize the cognitive and inductive properties before the operation is performed, the coefficient m ₁ of the observation time Ob is set to be relatively high in the analysis calculation unit, and the operability and the inductive property during the operation are emphasized. be relatively high operation execution time and the coefficient m ₂ of Ex coefficients m ₄ of the operation form accuracy rate Er1 is desirable.

In another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the input section includes an observation time Ob, an operation execution time Ex, an operation mode correct answer rate Op, a malfunction frequency Er1 to an evaluation target portion, and an evaluation target portion. Other than the above, the number of malfunctions Er2, the number of peeks Pt, the number of utterances St, the number of facial expression changes Et, and the weighting factors m ₁ to m ₈ are input, and the analysis calculation unit inputs m ₁ Ob + m ₂ Ex + m ₃ (1-Op) + m ₄ Er1 + m ₅ Er2 + m ₆ Pt
When calculating the evaluation score of operability using the functional formula of + m ₇ St + m ₈ Et,
m ₁ = 1, m ₂ = 1, m ₃ = 1, m ₄ = 2/3, m ₅ = 2 /
The behavior analysis device for operability evaluation is characterized in that 3, m ₆ = 5/9, m ₇ = 0.5, and m ₈ = 1/3.

Thus, the operability can be evaluated and analyzed by comparing the operability evaluation scores of a plurality of devices or parts of the devices obtained by the present apparatus, and an operability evaluation and behavior analysis expert The same evaluation as is possible.

In another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the input section includes the observation time Ob, the operation execution time Ex, the operation form correct answer rate Op, the number of malfunctions Er1 to the evaluation target portion, and the evaluation target portion. Number of malfunctions other than Er2, number of peeks Pt, number of utterances St, facial expression change, number of times Et, and weighting coefficient m ₁
Enter the m ₈ from the analysis calculation _{unit, m 1 Ob + m 2 Ex} + m 3 (1-Op) + m 4 Er1 + m 5 Er2 + m 6 Pt
+ M ₇ St + m _{8 When} calculating the operability evaluation score using the functional expression, m ₁ to m ₈ are impressions of the operation from multiple test operators who operated the device to be evaluated. Sensory values obtained by investigation, the operability evaluation items obtained by multiple regression analysis using Ob, Ex, Op, Er1, Er2, Pt, St, Et obtained from a plurality of the test operators. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation, which is a weighting coefficient.

As a result, the behavior of the test operator is calculated by calculating the operability evaluation score for a plurality of devices or parts of the device obtained by this apparatus and setting the weighting coefficient by the multiple regression analysis. It is possible to evaluate the operability in consideration of not only the information obtained from the above, but also the impression of the operation. In addition, since it is possible to quantitatively evaluate and analyze the operability according to the operation purpose, operability difficulty, and characteristics, it is difficult to be influenced by the conditions of the device to be evaluated. The same evaluation as is possible.

According to another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention, the analysis operation unit is: m ₁ Ob × m ₂ Ex × m ₃ (1-Op) × m ₄ Er 1 × m ₅ Er 2 × m ₆ Pt
It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation characterized by using a functional expression of × m ₇ St × m ₈ Et.

Another aspect of the operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus of the present invention is characterized in that the analytic calculation unit calculates the operability evaluation score for each variable and the term of the weighting coefficient by a combination of mathematical methods. It is a behavior analysis device for operability evaluation.

According to the above two aspects, it is possible to use a relational expression that is more accurate and easy for each evaluator to understand, depending on the characteristics of the device to be evaluated, the evaluation purpose, the priority items, and the like.

Another aspect of the behavior analysis apparatus for evaluating operability of the present invention is that the recording medium of the video reproducing section is a magnetic tape, a compact disk, a flexible disk, a hard disk, a magneto-optical disk, a digital versatile disk. , Or a memory card, or a plurality of memory cards for operability evaluation.

According to this, it is possible to evaluate and analyze the operability by utilizing not only the video tape medium but also various recording media.

[0039]

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION Embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. It should be noted that the embodiments described below are for the purpose of explanation, and do not limit the scope of the present invention. Therefore, those skilled in the art can adopt embodiments in which each of these elements or all elements are replaced by equivalents thereof, but these embodiments are also included in the scope of the present invention.

FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the appearance of the operability evaluation experiment. As shown in the figure, two video cameras are prepared, and the video camera 2 photographs the entire device 3 to be evaluated for operability including the upper body of the test operator. The video camera 1 captures a close-up of the operator's hand and the device 3. The captured video images are recorded on a recording medium built into each video camera and transferred to an analysis personal computer 5 having a video reproduction section, an input section, an analysis calculation section and a display section. The analysis personal computer 5 compresses the transferred video image and saves it on a recording medium, and also generates the soft data 4. The soft data 4 is reproduced by the video reproducing unit of the analyzing personal computer 5, and after the operability evaluation items are input by the input unit, the analysis / calculation unit performs totaling and analysis. The operability evaluation result and the analysis result are output to the display unit 6 of the analysis personal computer 5.

In this embodiment, any recording medium such as a magnetic tape, a compact disc, a flexible disc, a hard disc, a magneto-optical disc, a digital versatile disc, or a memory card can be used as the recording medium. Anything can be used.

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing the appearance of a receipt printer as an example of the device 3 shown in FIG. This printer is a device that prints on receipt paper, and has an ink ribbon cassette 53 for printing inside. Further, it has an ink ribbon cassette cover 51 which covers the ink ribbon cassette 53 and has an auto cutter unit for mechanically cutting the printed paper, and a lever 52 is attached to the ink cassette cover 51. The lever 52 is operated by lifting the lever 52 in the vertical direction to release the lock, and while keeping this state, the lever 52 and the ink ribbon cassette cover 51 are simultaneously moved to the test evaluator side, that is, to the upper right of FIG. While rotating
It is to lift up. As an example of operating the lever 52, the ink ribbon cassette 5 is mainly used when the printing function of the ink ribbon cassette 53 is lost or deteriorated.
This is the case of exchanging 3.

In this embodiment, the shape of the lever 52 is changed and each lever 52 is attached to a plurality of devices 3 to extract the device 3 having high operability.

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing different shapes of the lever 52. In the following, an example will be shown in which three types of evaluated devices 3 are prepared using levers L1, L2, and L3, respectively, and an operability evaluation experiment by 10 test operators is performed.

First, in FIG. 1, the lever 5 in the device 3
2 is operated to prompt the test operator to take out the ink ribbon cassette 53. It is premised that the test operator does not know how to operate the lever 52. Next, the experiment ends when the test operator accurately operates the lever 52, lifts the ink ribbon cassette cover 51 upward, and removes the ink ribbon cassette 53. The state of the test operator during the experiment is photographed by the video camera 1 and the video camera 2.

Hereinafter, behavior analysis by the behavior analysis apparatus for operability evaluation of the present invention, that is, evaluation items related to operability based on the behavior of the test operator during the operability evaluation experiment, such as observation time, operation execution time, and number of malfunctions. A procedure for evaluating the operability using the operation form will be described.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a procedure of behavior analysis by the analyzing personal computer 5. After the system is loaded by a click operation with a mouse (not shown) and activated (S100), the image of the receipt printer of FIG. 2 is loaded and an initial screen for inputting information of the test operator is displayed on the display unit 6. It is displayed (S101). Here, the information of the operator who has been investigated in advance, such as age,
Information such as sex, age of test operator, and dominant hand is input (S102). The input information is recorded as test operator information (S110). FIG. 4 shows an example of the input screen. When the input is completed, the “measurement screen” button (A1) in FIG. 4 is clicked, and the analysis screen is displayed on the display unit 6 and reproduced (S103). Then, a screen showing a close-up of the device 3 is reproduced and analysis is started (S10).
4).

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a screen for behavior analysis. As shown in FIG. 5, the action analysis screen includes an image reproduction unit (A2) for reproducing an image and buttons for checking the action. As these buttons, there are provided a button (A6) for checking a measurement target time such as an observation time and an operation execution time, a button (A4) for selecting an operation form and a malfunction. Video playback is performed by clicking the start and stop buttons (A3). In addition, the video can be rewound and fast-forwarded by dragging the slide bar (A5) below the video frame. During the reproduction of the video, the evaluator performs a click operation with the mouse at the moment when the test operator reaches a predetermined motion.
This operation is an example of manually inputting data of operability evaluation items. Here, the predetermined operation refers to, for example, observation start, operation start, and operation completion of the test operator. Note that it is effective to use repeated reproduction, slow reproduction, and frame advance reproduction together, in order to more accurately capture the moment of a predetermined operation.

Returning again to the description of FIG. When you capture a predetermined motion moment while playing back the video, and the measurement target time such as observation time is input to the input section as operability evaluation item data, the application sheet that creates the summary table operates and the measurement result is displayed. Automatically tabulated and recorded (S11
1). FIG. 6 shows an example of an aggregate sheet in which the measurement target times are aggregated.

In the above description, an example in which the data of the operability evaluation item is manually input by using the click operation of the mouse has been shown, but the present invention is not limited to this manual mode, and the data is automatically input. You can also For example, the device 3 is provided with a plurality of sensors for automatically detecting the operation state, and the sensor detects the moment when a predetermined operation such as detecting that the test operator touches the device 3 is detected, and the information is detected. You may make it calculate automatically as measurement object time. Specifically, the sensor is a sensor that can detect an external force applied to the lever, and is provided in a portion that is not visible to the test operator, and the information touched by the lever is input to the input unit at the same time when the test operator touches it. Equipped with. As another example, the ink ribbon cassette cover 51 has a configuration in which a sensor that reacts when the ink ribbon cassette cover 51 is opened to a predetermined angle is used to input information that the ink ribbon cassette cover 51 is opened to a certain angle to an input unit. Furthermore, the sensor for automatic measurement is not limited to the above, and various configurations are conceivable. Hereinafter, a sensor applicable to the device to be evaluated including the lever having the lock mechanism will be described.

As a sensor for detecting the touch of the test operator, a pressure sensor, an acceleration sensor, a strain gauge or the like is attached to a portion such as the back surface of the lever which cannot be seen by the test operator. The pressure when the lever is held is detected by a change in the electrical resistance of the sensor, etc., and a signal is output. Alternatively, a method in which the material itself of the lever itself is composed of a pressure sensitive resin, a variable resistance resin, or the like, and similarly, the test operator detects the time for which the lever is held can be cited.

Further, as a sensor for detecting the opening / closing of the opening / closing part and the engagement / disengagement of the lock mechanism etc., electricity is conducted to the lock mechanism part including the ON / OFF detection of the mechanical switch. A material is used to detect a change in electrical resistance when the lever lock mechanism is released, a change in light transmission is detected by an optical sensor, or a sensor change due to magnetism is detected to reach a predetermined opening angle. It is possible to input automatically when the arrival of.

In this way, when the measurement target time such as the observation time is automatically input to the input section as the operability evaluation item data by the sensor, the application sheet for creating the tabulation is activated and the measurement result is automatically calculated. Are recorded and recorded (S111).

A large image of the operator operating the device 3 is reproduced as the first reproduction (S104), and the total operation time, the observation time, the operation execution time and the operation form are measured (S105). When these measurements are completed, a screen showing a close-up of the device is reproduced again as the second reproduction (S106), and measurement of the number of malfunctions is started (S10).
7). The number of malfunctions is input to the input unit by a mouse click operation when there is a malfunction. The results of measuring the number of malfunctions are automatically tabulated and recorded (S111).

Here, the evaluation criteria will be described. The shorter the total operation time, which is the sum of the observation time and the operation execution time, the higher the operability. The operation form is evaluated as having high operability when the target operation form is performed. It is evaluated that the smaller the number of malfunctions, the higher the operability.

When the measurement is completed for all measurement items, the system is terminated (S109), and at the same time, the result data tabulated and recorded in the tabulation sheet of FIG. 4 is automatically saved (S112).

When comparing the operability of the same type of equipment, the total operation time is short and correct, that is, the proportion of the number of people who have performed the operation mode intended by the designer is high, and the operability is high if there are few malfunctions. evaluate.

A modified example of the present invention is shown below.

In the above-described embodiment, each measurement target time, operation mode, and malfunction are measured, but the number or combination of items to be measured may be modified and used for evaluation depending on the intention of the evaluator. In addition, the third time reproduction is performed as in S108 of FIG. 3, and the characteristic gesture, utterance, and facial expression are used as the data of the operability evaluation item by using the screen that is a close-up of the entire test operator, and the operability is evaluated. It can also be used for.
Here, the input of the characteristic gesture or the like can be realized by clicking the mouse at the moment when the operation is performed.

When inputting into the input section, a keyboard may be used instead of a pointing device such as a mouse.

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a procedure for obtaining an analysis result of operability by executing the processing program.

By a key input from a keyboard (not shown), the program in the analysis personal computer 5 in FIG. 1 starts processing (P1). First, the program is for each sample, that is, for L1, L2, and L3 (see FIG. 7),
From the operation results of the test operator in each sample, that is, the results of 10 samples from each sample, the average value of the total operation time and the standard deviation value, the average value of the observation time and the standard deviation value, the average value of the operation execution time And the value of standard deviation is calculated. Similarly, the average value and standard deviation of the number of malfunctions to the evaluation target, and as for the operation form, the ratio of the test operator having the correct operation form is calculated over the initial operation and the completion of the operation. . (P2) Further, in order to show the above-mentioned calculation result in a visually easily understandable form, the result of each evaluation item is output to the display unit on the device in a graph format (P3).

An example of the result of the total operation time is shown in FIG. 9, an example of the result of the observation time is shown in FIG. 10, and an example of the result of the operation execution time is shown in FIG.
1 shows an example of the result of the operation mode correct answer rate, and FIG. 13 shows an example of the result of the number of malfunctions on the evaluation target.

It is possible to examine the operability evaluation results with reference to FIGS.

As shown in FIG. 9, the superiority or inferiority of the operability can be judged from the graph of the total operation time of the evaluation result. It can be seen from FIG. 9 that the total operation time is slightly better for L1 than for L3. L2 is much longer than L1 and L3, and L2 is longer than L1.
And L3, it is found that the total operation time is slightly inferior. In the figure, lever 1 is L
1, lever 2 is L2, and lever 3 is L3.

As shown in FIGS. 10 and 11, the superiority or inferiority of the operability can be judged from the graphs of the observation time of the evaluation result and the operation execution time.

In the result of the observation time of FIG. 10, L1,
No significant difference was observed between the L2 and L3 samples,
From the result of the operation execution time of FIG. 11, it can be seen that L2 takes much longer than L1 and L3. That is, in terms of operation execution time, L3 is L1 and L2.
The operability is inferior compared to, and it can be seen that there is some problem in the process from the first lever operation to the completion of the operation.

As shown in FIG. 12, it is possible to determine the superiority or inferiority of the operability from the graph of the correct rate of the operation form as the evaluation result.

Regarding the operation mode correct answer rate of FIG. 12, it is understood that the operation mode correct answer rate at the time of completion of the operation is the same for L1 and L3, and is better than L2. However, the accuracy rate of the operation mode at the time of initial operation, that is, the accuracy rate of the operation mode when the lever is touched for the first time after starting the experiment, is inferior to the results of L1 and L3. . Therefore, it can be seen that L1 has the best operability in terms of the accuracy rate of the operation form.

As shown in FIG. 13, it is possible to judge the superiority or inferiority of the operability from the graph of the number of malfunctions of the evaluation result to the portion to be evaluated.

From FIG. 13, L1 has the least number of malfunctions to be evaluated, and the remaining L2 and L3 are slightly malfunctioning, that is, inaccurate operations are more likely to occur, and the operability in terms of malfunction is L1. Is the best, and L2 and L3 are slightly inferior.

From the above results, the device to be evaluated is evaluated at which stage in the series of operations by totaling the results for each evaluation item, that is, the series of operations from the start to the end of the operation. You can understand in detail whether there is a difference in the operability of.

Here, the description returns to FIG. By quantifying and indicating the operability of the above evaluation results all together, it becomes easy to judge the superiority or inferiority of the operability (P4). The operability is shown as a more objective quantitative value by weighting each evaluation item and adding up the weighted results.

FIG. 14 shows an example of the calculation result. As an example of weighting, m ₁ Ob + m ₂ Ex + m ₃ (1-Op) + m ₄ Er1 +
In the functional formula of m ₅ Er2 + m ₆ Pt + m ₇ St + m ₈ Et, the total operation time, that is, the observation time and the operation execution time, and the weighting factors for the number of malfunctions of the evaluation target are m ₁ = 1 and m ₂ = 1, respectively.
Set m ₃ = 1 and m ₄ = 1 and set other weighting factors as
Quantification was carried out with m ₅ = 0, m ₆ = 0, m ₇ = 0, m ₈ = 0.

Here, it is judged that the lower the value obtained by adding all the scores is, the better the operability is, and the operability of L1 is the highest, and the difference of the operability between L2 and L3 is quantitative. Can understand.

Another example of the weighting coefficient setting method is shown below.
You Operate the device to be evaluated and finish the operation
Investigate the test operator's impression of the operation, etc.
Investigate by. The contents of the interview survey are, for example,
The evaluation target part was very easy to use.
It was easy, the evaluation target part was slightly easy to use, etc.
The evaluation target part is not easy to use.
The value target part was difficult to use, the evaluation target part was very
It was difficult to test with 7 levels of answer candidates.
The author makes arbitrary answers. Obtained from the above 7 levels
Answered answers in order of 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 points and score
Turn into. Impression of the operation obtained from the test operator
The sensory value I was used as the response to the scraping survey, and the operability of the test operator
Evaluation analysis results Ob, Ex, Op, Er1, Er2, Pt, St, Et are used.
Multiple regression analysis. For multiple regression analysis, n people (n is 2 or more)
Sensory value of the above evaluation result, I₁Through I_n  And said n people
Operability evaluation analysis results of Ob₁Through Ob_n  Ex₁Through Ex_nAnd
And Op₁Through Op_n  And Er1₁Through Er1_n  And Er2₁
To Er2_n  And, Pt ₁Through Pt_nAnd St₁Through St_nAnd
And Et₁Through Et_n  , The objective variable is I, and the explanatory variable
Set the number as Ob, Ex, Op, Er1, Er2, Pt, St, Et, and repeat
Perform a homecoming analysis. Weight obtained from the result of the multiple regression analysis
Coefficient m₁To m₈Using the relational expression m₁Ob + m₂Ex + m₃(1-Op) + m_FourEr1 + m_FiveEr2 + m₆Pt
+ M₇St + m₈Et Is calculated to quantify the operability. Ob, Ex, Op, Er
For 1, Er2, Pt, St, Et, use the average of the results of the above n people
It

The setting method of the weighting coefficient is intended to set the weighting coefficient more accurately according to the difficulty level and characteristics of the device to be evaluated, and the details of the setting method are not limited to the above method. Not something. The contents of the interview survey, the level of the sensory value I of the answer, and the score can be freely set by the evaluator. For example, the content of the interview survey was easy to use, neither
You can freely choose from 3 levels of answers, such as difficulty in use. In this case, the answer score is 0 or 50.
You can set points, 100 points, etc.

In the method of quantifying the operability by the multiple regression analysis, the sensory value I obtained from 10 test operators was used.
And operability evaluation results Ob, Ex, Op, Er1, Er2, Pt, S
As a result of performing multiple regression analysis using t and Et, the observation time and the operation execution time are finally selected as the explanatory variables, and the relational expression showing the operability is calculated as -1.17 + 2.91 Ob + 2.91 Ex.

Scoring using this relational expression (P4 in FIG. 8)
The result of performing the above is as shown in FIG. 15. Again, it is judged that the lower the numerical value obtained by adding all the scores, the better the operability is, and the operability of L1 is the highest, as in FIG. And the difference in operability between L2 and L3 can be grasped quantitatively. By calculating the weighting coefficient using multiple regression analysis, if the weighting coefficient is calculated in advance by the preliminary experiment of the operability evaluation experiment, the evaluation items to be evaluated with priority will be clarified, and the weighting of the evaluation items will increase. Be done exactly. After outputting the scores as shown in FIGS. 14 and 15, the program in the analysis personal computer 5 finishes the process (P5 in FIG. 8).

In the relational expression, the terms of each variable and the weighting coefficient are formed by addition for general and intuitive understanding, but the present invention is not limited to this. For example, in the relational expression of the evaluation score of the operability, each variable and the term of the weighting coefficient are at least addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, exponentiation, differentiation, integration, matrix calculation, vector method, statistical method. It is possible to calculate the operability evaluation score by a combination of mathematical methods such as. An example is shown below.

[0081] Or Or (T: required time u: number of counts) or (N: total number of test operators) or

According to the above relational expressions, it is possible to calculate using a relational expression that is more accurate and easy for each evaluator to understand, depending on the difficulty level, characteristics, evaluation purpose, priority items, etc. of the device to be evaluated. is there.

The results of the implementation of the present invention will be described below.
In evaluating the operability of the levers L1, L2, and L3 of the device 3, usually, only subjective evaluation based on questionnaire results or the like can be performed. However, various devices having the means of the present invention shown in FIGS. By the evaluation using the evaluation behavior analysis device, as shown in FIGS. 9 to 15, a value indicating quantitative operability was obtained, and the objective evaluation became possible.

Further, the evaluation of the levers L1, L2, L3 of the device 3 which actually took 53 minutes in the evaluation by the conventional action analysis by the video deck is performed by the action analysis device for evaluation of various devices having the means of the present invention. The evaluation time was 32 minutes, and the remarkable effect of the present invention was confirmed.

Further, if an inexperienced person is not experienced in the above operability evaluation, the evaluation accuracy comparable to that of an expert could not be obtained. However, by using the apparatus and the operation manual of the present invention, even the inexperienced person is an operability evaluation behavior analyzer. The same evaluation accuracy as was obtained.

In addition, although the variation depending on the operation evaluator was large in the above-described conventional evaluation method, the present invention makes it possible to obtain a result in which the individual difference among the operation evaluators is also extremely small and the dispersion is extremely small.

[0087]

As described above, according to the present invention, a test operator operating a device is photographed by a video camera, and the operability of various devices is observed from the operation observation, and the total operation time, observation time, operation Quantify the superiority or inferiority of the operability of the same model or the same type of operation unit, regardless of the psychological state and prejudice of the analyst, based on the execution time, correct operation rate, number of malfunctions, number of peeks, number of utterances, number of facial expression changes Quantitative evaluation by obtaining the value,
Can be analyzed.

In addition to quantitatively ascertaining the superiority or inferiority of the overall operability, the operability of the operation at each step can also be quantitatively ascertained.

In the present apparatus, by adding the multiple regression analysis by the preliminary experiment, it becomes possible to evaluate the operability in consideration of not only the information obtained from the behavior of the test operator but also the impression of the operation. In addition, since it is possible to quantitatively evaluate and analyze the operability according to the operation purpose, operability difficulty, and characteristics, it is difficult to depend on the conditions of the device to be evaluated. Equivalent evaluation is possible.

Further, since the present invention can be realized on a personal computer and the operation is simple, it is possible to easily evaluate and analyze the operability of various devices without imposing a time burden on a test operator. In particular, the time required for the evaluation can be significantly shortened when the evaluation is performed by using the present device, as compared with the measurement method using the conventional video deck.

Furthermore, by preparing an operation manual and a commentary menu with unified judgment criteria, even users who have no specialized analysis knowledge and inexperienced people can evaluate the operability of the device more objectively and accurately. Can be analyzed.

Further, in the present invention, even an evaluator who does not have specialized knowledge can evaluate the operability by using this device.

In addition, variations among the evaluators are suppressed, and evaluation results are not influenced by the evaluators. That is, it is possible to obtain the evaluation result of the operability with very little individual difference among the evaluators.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an appearance of a operability evaluation experiment.

FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an appearance of a receipt printer that is an example of the device 3.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a procedure of behavior analysis by the analysis personal computer 5.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an initial screen for inputting information of a test operator.

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a screen for behavior analysis.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a totalization sheet in which measurement target times are totaled.

FIG. 7 is a view showing a different shape of the lever 52.

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a procedure for obtaining an analysis result of operability by executing a processing program.

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a result of total operation time, which is an example of an operability evaluation result.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a result of observation time, which is an example of the operability evaluation result.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a result of operation execution time, which is an example of an operability evaluation result.

FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a result of an operation form correct answer rate, which is an example of an operability evaluation result.

FIG. 13 is a diagram showing a result of the number of malfunctions which is an example of the operability evaluation result.

FIG. 14 is a diagram showing calculation results of quantitative values as an example of operability evaluation results.

FIG. 15 is a diagram showing a score result as an example of the operability evaluation result.

[Explanation of symbols]

1 video camera 2 video cameras 3 equipment 4 soft data 5 PC for analysis 6 Display 51 Ink ribbon cassette cover 52 lever 53 Ink ribbon cassette

   ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continued front page    (72) Inventor Satoshi Hosoya             3-15-1, Tsuneda, Ueda City, Nagano Prefecture Shinshu University             Faculty of Fiber Science, Department of Kansei Engineering (72) Inventor ▲ Takaji Masayuki             3-15-1, Tsuneda, Ueda City, Nagano Prefecture Shinshu University             Faculty of Fiber Science, Department of Kansei Engineering F term (reference) 2F076 BA01 BB01 BD05 BD10 BD11                       BD17 BD19 BE01 BE04 BE05                       BE08 BE09 BE13

Claims (14)

[Claims] 1. In a device operability evaluation experiment, a video reproduction unit for recording and reproducing an operation video of a test operator, and information measured from the recording of the video reproduction unit is automatically or automatically used as data of the operability evaluation item. An input unit for manually inputting, an analysis operation unit for automatically collecting and analyzing the operability evaluation item data input from the input unit, and a display unit for displaying an analysis result in the analysis operation unit. The behavior analysis device for operability evaluation, wherein the analysis calculation unit quantifies the level of operability by a combination of specific functional expressions and calculates the level as an analysis result. 2. The input unit automatically inputs information detected by a sensor attached to a device to be evaluated to at least one item of the operability evaluation items. The described behavior analysis device for operability evaluation. 3. The video reproduction unit reproduces the operation video of the test operator a plurality of times, and sets the measured information as at least one of the operability evaluation items. Alternatively, the behavior analysis device for operability evaluation according to any one of 2 above. 4. The analysis unit inputs the observation time Ob for observing without touching the device to be evaluated and the operation execution time Ex for operating while touching the device to be evaluated. Is the total operating time for the equipment under evaluation
The operation analysis for operability evaluation according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein OT = Ob + Ex is calculated, and the display unit quantitatively displays the OT as an operability evaluation score. apparatus. 5. The input unit includes a time Es at which the test operator starts an experiment, a time Os at which the test operator first touches a specific part of the evaluated device, and an operation by the test operator. Input time Oe, and the analysis operation unit calculates the total operation time OT = Oe−Es for the device to be evaluated, the observation time Ob = Os−Es, and the operation execution time Ex = Oe−Os. The behavior analysis device for operability evaluation according to claim 1, wherein the display unit quantitatively displays the Ex as an operability evaluation score. 6. The input unit inputs the number of malfunctions Er1 in which an improper operation is performed on a portion to be evaluated of the device to be evaluated, which is characterized in that the input unit inputs the number of malfunctions Er1. Behavior analysis device for operability evaluation. 7. The input unit inputs the number of malfunctions Er2 in which an improper operation is performed on a portion other than the evaluation target portion of the device to be evaluated, as input.
The behavior analysis device for operability evaluation according to the item. 8. The input unit inputs the number of times or the number of people c who have been in a correct operation form from an experiment result of a plurality of times or a plurality of people (a result of an operation form of n times or n people), and the analysis calculation The section calculates an operation mode correct answer rate Op = c / n in which the test operator operates the device to be evaluated in a correct operation mode assumed by the designer, and the display section calculates Op as the operability evaluation score. The operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the behavior analysis apparatus is quantitatively displayed as. 9. The input unit, in addition to the observation time Ob, the operation execution time Ex, the operation mode correct answer rate Op, the number of malfunctions Er1 to the evaluation target portion, the number of malfunctions Er2 other than the evaluation target portion, the test operator The number of times the operator has looked into the device under evaluation Pt, the number of times the test operator has spoken, the number of utterances St, and the number of times the facial expression of the test operator has changed, the number of facial expression changes Et.
And the weighting factors m ₁ , m ₂ , m ₃ , m ₄ , m of the operability evaluation items
_5, m _6, m _7, and inputs the m _8, wherein the analysis arithmetic _{unit, m 1 Ob + m 2 Ex} + m 3 (1-Op) + m 4 Er1 + m 5 Er2 + m 6 Pt
+ M ₇ St + m ₈ Et When calculating the operability evaluation score using the functional formula, the values of m ₁ , m ₂ , m ₃ , m ₄ , m ₅ , m ₆ , m ₇ , and m ₈ are evaluated. The operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein the behavior analysis apparatus can be freely set by a person. 10. The input unit includes an observation time Ob, an operation execution time Ex, an operation form correct answer rate Op, a malfunction frequency Er1 to an evaluation target portion, a malfunction frequency Er2 to a portion other than the evaluation target portion, a peek frequency Pt, and an utterance. The number of times St, the number of facial expression changes Et, and the weighting factors m ₁ to m ₈ are input, and the analysis calculation unit calculates m ₁ Ob + m ₂ Ex + m ₃ (1-Op) + m ₄ Er1 + m ₅ Er2 + m ₆ Pt.
In calculating the evaluation score of operability using the functional expression of + m ₇ St + m ₈ Et, m ₁ = 1, m ₂ = 1, m ₃ = 1, m ₄ = 2/3, m ₅ = 2 /
_{3, m 6 = 5/9} , m 7 = 0.5, and m ₈ = 1/3 and operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 8, characterized in that . 11. The input unit includes an observation time Ob, an operation execution time Ex, an operation mode correct answer rate Op, a malfunction frequency Er1 to an evaluation target part, a malfunction frequency Er2 to a part other than the evaluation target part, a peek frequency Pt, and an utterance. The number of times St, the change in facial expression, the number of times Et, and the weighting factors m ₁ to m ₈ are input, and the analysis calculation unit: m ₁ Ob + m ₂ Ex + m ₃ (1-Op) + m ₄ Er1 + m ₅ Er2 + m ₆ Pt
In calculating the operability evaluation score using the functional expression of + m ₇ St + m ₈ Et, m ₁ to m ₈ are impressions of the operation from a plurality of test operators who operated the device to be evaluated. Sensory values obtained by hearing survey, operability evaluation items obtained by multiple regression analysis using the Ob, Ex, Op, Er1, Er2, Pt, St, Et obtained from the plurality of test operators The operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein: 12. The analysis / calculation unit comprises: m ₁ Ob × m ₂ Ex × m ₃ (1-Op) × m ₄ Er1 × m ₅ Er2 × m ₆ Pt
The operability evaluation behavior analysis apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 3 or 5 to _{8, wherein} a functional expression of × m ₇ St × m ₈ Et is used. 13. The analysis calculation unit calculates the operability evaluation score by combining the terms of each variable and the weighting coefficient with a mathematical method, according to any one of claims 1 to 8. Behavior analysis device for operability evaluation. 14. The recording medium of the video reproducing section is a magnetic tape, a compact disc, a flexible disc,
The operability evaluation action according to any one of claims 1 to 13, further comprising one or more of a hard disk, a magneto-optical disk, a digital versatile disk, and a memory card. Analyzer.