38:. The tester and team must define a target population for testing, schedule participants to come into the lab, decide on how the users' behaviors will be measured, construct a test script and have participants engage in a verbal protocol (e.g. think aloud). However it differs from these methods in that it advocates that changes to the user interface are made as soon as a problem is identified and a solution is clear. Sometimes this can occur after observing as few as one participant. Once the data for a participant has been collected the usability engineer and team decide if they will be making any changes to the prototype prior to the next participant. The changed interface is then tested with the remaining users.
293:
41:
The philosophy behind the RITE method is described as: "1) once you find a problem, solve it as soon as you can, and 2) make the decision makers part of the research team." In this way it is a bridge between a strict research method and a design method...and in many ways it represents a
177:. Proceedings of the third international conference on human-computer interaction on Designing and using human-computer interfaces and knowledge based systems (2nd ed.). Boston, Massachusetts, United States. pp. 394–401.
27:
method. It was defined by
Michael Medlock, Dennis Wixon, Bill Fulton, Mark Terrano and Ramon Romero. It has been publicly championed by Dennis Wixon while working in the games space for
42:
participatory design method. Since its official definition and naming its use has rapidly expanded to many other software industries, including interface design research.
223:
Medlock MC, Wixon D, McGee M, Welsh D (January 2005). "The rapid iterative test and evaluation method: Better products in less time.". In Bias G, Mayhew D (eds.).
334:
107:
207:
189:
358:
327:
56:
240:"Multi-Disciplinary Design and Implementation of a Mass Vaccination Clinic Mobile Application to Support Decision-Making"
320:
123:
Wixon D (July 2003). "Evaluating usability methods: why the current literature fails the practitioner".
300:
86:
112:. Usability Professionals Association. Vol. 51. Orlando Florida. pp. 1963813932–562338474.
353:
140:
66:
51:
269:
203:
81:
35:
259:
251:
195:
132:
71:
199:
304:
264:
239:
347:
61:
144:
292:
255:
76:
28:
24:
273:
136:
109:
Using the RITE method to improve products: A definition and a case study
244:
106:
Medlock MC, Wixon D, Terrano M, Romero R, Fulton B (July 2002).
23:, typically referred to as "RITE" testing, is an iterative
34:
It has many similarities to "traditional" or "discount"
308:
188:
Drachen A, Mirza-Babaei P, Nacke L, eds. (2018-03-22).
227:. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 489–517.
238:Tennant R, Tetui M, Grindrod K, Burns CM (2023).
328:
8:
335:
321:
263:
194:. Vol. 1. Oxford University Press.
98:
160:A Practical Guide to Usability Testing
21:Rapid Iterative Testing and Evaluation
7:
289:
287:
175:Usability engineering at a discount
200:10.1093/oso/9780198794844.001.0001
14:
291:
1:
307:. You can help Knowledge by
173:Nielsen J (September 1989).
158:Dumas J, Redish JC (1993).
375:
359:Software engineering stubs
286:
256:10.1109/JTEHM.2022.3224740
57:Human–computer interaction
225:Cost-justifying usability
162:. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
303:-related article is a
137:10.1145/838830.838870
301:software-engineering
87:User-centered design
191:Games User Research
67:Interaction design
52:Acceptance testing
316:
315:
209:978-0-19-879484-4
82:Usability testing
36:usability testing
366:
337:
330:
323:
295:
288:
278:
277:
267:
235:
229:
228:
220:
214:
213:
185:
179:
178:
170:
164:
163:
155:
149:
148:
120:
114:
113:
103:
72:Software testing
374:
373:
369:
368:
367:
365:
364:
363:
344:
343:
342:
341:
284:
282:
281:
237:
236:
232:
222:
221:
217:
210:
187:
186:
182:
172:
171:
167:
157:
156:
152:
122:
121:
117:
105:
104:
100:
95:
48:
12:
11:
5:
372:
370:
362:
361:
356:
346:
345:
340:
339:
332:
325:
317:
314:
313:
296:
280:
279:
230:
215:
208:
180:
165:
150:
115:
97:
96:
94:
91:
90:
89:
84:
79:
74:
69:
64:
59:
54:
47:
44:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
371:
360:
357:
355:
352:
351:
349:
338:
333:
331:
326:
324:
319:
318:
312:
310:
306:
302:
297:
294:
290:
285:
275:
271:
266:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
234:
231:
226:
219:
216:
211:
205:
201:
197:
193:
192:
184:
181:
176:
169:
166:
161:
154:
151:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
119:
116:
111:
110:
102:
99:
92:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
73:
70:
68:
65:
63:
62:Human factors
60:
58:
55:
53:
50:
49:
45:
43:
39:
37:
32:
30:
26:
22:
18:
309:expanding it
298:
283:
247:
243:
233:
224:
218:
190:
183:
174:
168:
159:
153:
131:(4): 28–34.
128:
125:Interactions
124:
118:
108:
101:
40:
33:
20:
16:
15:
17:RITE Method
348:Categories
93:References
354:Usability
250:: 60–69.
77:Usability
29:Microsoft
25:usability
274:36654771
145:17052230
46:See also
265:9842226
272:
262:
206:
143:
19:, for
299:This
141:S2CID
305:stub
270:PMID
204:ISBN
260:PMC
252:doi
196:doi
133:doi
31:.
350::
268:.
258:.
248:11
246:.
242:.
202:.
139:.
129:10
127:.
336:e
329:t
322:v
311:.
276:.
254::
212:.
198::
147:.
135::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
