Organizations have recognized usability engineering as a needed step in the development process to ensure the success of any product. As is the case in all competitive settings areas for improvement are scouted and always welcomed. In the case of usability engineering a lot of time, money, equipment, and other resources are spent to gather usability data to identify and resolve usability problems in order to improve their product. The usability data gained from the expenditure of resources is often only applied to the development effort at hand and not reused across projects and across different development groups within the organization. More over, the usability data are often used at a level that forces the organization to only apply the data to that specific development effort. However, if usability data can be abstracted from the specific development effort and analyzed in relation to the process that created and identified the data; the data can then be used and applied over multiple development efforts. The User Action Framework (UAF) is a hierarchical framework of usability concepts that ensures consistency through completeness and precision. The UAF by its nature classifies usability problems at a high level. This high level classification affords usability engineers to not only apply the knowledge gained to the current development effort but to apply the knowledge across multiple development efforts. This author presents a mechanism and a process to allow usability engineers to find insights in their usability data to identify both strengths and weaknesses in their process. In return usability practitioners and companies can increase their return on investment by extending the usefulness of usability data over multiple development efforts. / Master of Science

Given the prominence of the transformational theory of action in major urban educational reform efforts, this study intends to describe and analyze the initial and sustaining leadership actions taken by the superintendent and his leadership team, the board of trustees and the Dallas Achieves! Commission in the development of the Dallas Achieves! transformational theory of action framework. Specifically, this study seeks to encourage the research community to discover, understand, and gain insight concerning the Dallas Achieves! transformational theory of action. The study utilized the constructs of Bolman and Deal’s (2003) Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership four frames for “making sense” of organizations as the analytical tool for the description of initial and sustaining leadership actions taken to develop the Dallas Achieves! transformational theory of action framework. This analytical framework guided the data collection, categorization, and emergent themes. The answers to the research questions posed in this study emanated from the analysis of the data. The findings indicate the superintendent and his leadership team, the board of trustees, and the Dallas Achieves! Commission utilized specific leadership actions in the development of the Dallas Achieves! transformational theory of action framework. Ultimately, the findings of this study provide information for researchers and those who design, enact and implement transformational theories of action. / text

Various methods exist for performing usability evaluations, but there is no systematic framework for guiding and structuring assessment and reporting activities (Andre et al., 2000). Researchers at Virginia Tech have developed a theoretical foundation called the User Action Framework (UAF), which is an adaptation and extension of Norman's action model (1986). The main objective of developing the User Action Framework was to provide usability practitioners with a reliable and structured tool set for usability engineering support activities like classifying and reporting usability problems. In practice, the tool set has a web-based interface, with the User Action Framework serving as an underlying foundation. To be an effective classification and reporting tool, the UAF should be usable and reliable. This work addressed two important research activities to help determine the usability and reliability of the User Action Framework. First, we conducted a formative evaluation of the UAF Explorer, a component of the UAF, and its content. This led a re-design effort to fix these problems and to provide an interface that resulted in a more efficient and satisfying user experience. Another purpose of this research was to conduct a reliability study to determine if the User Action Framework showed significantly better than chance agreement when usability practitioners classified a given set of usability problem descriptions according to the structure of the UAF. The User Action Framework showed higher agreement scores compared to previous work using the tool. / Master of Science

This research studies protests after fraudulent elections in a collective action framework, examining the impact of the potential cost, benefit and likelihood of success of protest on the occurrence and intensity of protests. Quantitative analysis of fraudulent elections in about 100 countries from 1990 to 2004 shows that the odds of protest after fraudulent elections are greater when the level of state repression is moderate with a possible backlash effect of high repression, when the opposition is united, and when international monitors denounce election results. The analysis only partially supports the benefit of protest argument. Also, the research uses case studies from Eurasia (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, and Russia) and mini-case studies from Africa and Latin America to study in more detail the effects of the factors identified in the quantitative analysis and to identify overlooked but important explanatory factors using a set of extensive interviews conducted in the United States and during fieldwork in Armenia, Georgia, and Russia with politicians, domestic and international election monitors, and country experts.

The objective of this research project was to gain a better understanding of the language, policies and collaborative actions undertaken by planning and public health professionals that are relevant to the design of active communities. The overarching aim of this research was to develop resources to facilitate the collaborative efforts of planners and public health professionals working together to create active communities. To this end, three studies were undertaken. In the first study, publicly available documents, websites, and published reports from five Government of Ontario ministries were reviewed. The review produced 136 terms for inclusion in a joint glossary of terms for planners and public health professionals. In the second study legislation/strategies from the same five government ministries were reviewed and interviews were conducted with 10 government policy-makers to identify priorities, challenges and inter-sectoral collaboration to enhance the design of active communities. This process produced a policy inventory of 39 Ontario laws/strategies that govern planners and public heath professionals working to enhance the design of active communities and identified challenges related to achieving inter-ministry collaboration and coordination towards a provincial active communities’ agenda. The third study recruited planners and public health professionals working in the province of Ontario to participate in a concept mapping process to identify ways they currently work together to enhance the design of active communities. This process generated 72 actions that represent collaborative efforts planners and public health professionals engage in when designing active communities. These actions were then organized by importance and feasibility, resulting in the development of a coordinated action framework that features four planning actions for planners, nineteen proximal and six distal coordinated actions for planners and public health professionals and six public health actions for public health professionals. Collectively, results from these three studies contribute to our understanding of the language, policies, and collaborative actions employed by planning and public health professionals that are relevant to the design of active communities. The resources developed from this project are intended to support and facilitate the collaborative efforts of planners and public health professionals working to create active communities. / Thesis (Ph.D, Kinesiology & Health Studies) -- Queen's University, 2012-06-04 14:33:13.672

explosion in the use of computing and interactive systems of all kinds. This growth has brought with it an awareness among developers of interactive systems about the importance of user centered design and usability. In the Virginia Tech Usability tools lab, efforts are underway to develop tools and processes that assist in usability evaluation. This has led to the development of the User Action Framework (UAF) (Andre et al., 1999), a framework that forms the basis of several usability inspection tools like the Explorer, UPI (Usability Problem Inspector), UPC (Usability Problem Classifier) and the usability problem database. The UAF explorer is the tool in the toolkit, which allows users to explore and learn the structure of the UAF. The framework, in its final stages of development, is based on an interaction cycle derived from Norman's action model (1986). For its acceptance, the user action framework, which is based on human factors and cognitive concepts, needed a training program to make it accessible and understandable to the usability practioners in industry and academia. This thesis addressed the following research activities: (1) Developing a web-based training tool for the User Action Framework explorer and (2) Evaluating a web- based training tool using various formative evaluation techniques and a final summative evaluation to measure effectiveness of the training, transfer of training, knowledge/skill acquisition and reaction to the training. The summative evaluation used a pretest-posttest between subjects experimental design to determine the effectiveness of the training tool with the use of lecture-based training as a control group. The data collection included objective measures of performance and subjective measures through questionnaires and rating scales. The summative evaluation found no significant differences between gain scores on lecture-based training and web-based training under controlled conditions. Opportunities for future research were identified and the training tool is expected to contribute to the efforts of the VT usability tools lab towards educating usability professionals and researchers alike on the usefulness of the User Action Framework and its associated tools. This work also seeks to proliferate the use of web based training methods as a valuable way to train remote learners on such developing frameworks and toolkits. / Master of Science

Laboratory usability tests can be a rich source of usability information for software design, but are expensive to run and involve time-consuming data analysis. Expert review of software is cheaper, but highly dependent on the experience of the expert. Techniques are needed that maintain user involvement while reducing both the cost of user involvement and the time required to analyze data. The User Action Framework (UAF) is a classification scheme for usability problems that facilitates data analysis and reusability of information learned from one project to another, but is also reliant on expert interpretation of usability data, and classification can be difficult when user-supplied problem descriptions are incomplete. This study explored end-user classification of self-reported critical incidents (usability issues) using the UAF, a technique that was hoped to reduce expert interpretation of usability problems. It also explored end-user critical incident reporting from a usability session recording, rather than reporting incidents as soon as they occur, a technique that could be used in future studies to compare effectiveness of usability methods. Results indicate that users are not good at diagnosing their own critical incidents due to the level of detail required for proper classification, although observations suggest that users were able to provide usability information that would not have been captured by an expert observer. The recording technique was successful, and is recommended for future studies to further explore differences in the kind of information that can be gathered from end-users and from experts during usability studies. / Master of Science

The coronavirus pandemic has thoroughly tested the Swedish crisis management system. It has affected and involved a large number of actors, across sectors and levels of government. Scholars of crisis management have long been interested in different forms of collaboration between actors. This large-scale crisis provides an opportunity to enhance our understanding of collaborative crisis management and to help us better deal with crisis in the future. This study aims to further enhance our understanding of collaboration in crisis management through the lens of a cen- tral actor in the Swedish crisis management system: the county administrative boards (länsstyrelserna). This study focuses on regional crisis management, where the county administrative boards play a central role, and aims to describe the con- text in which the actors operate and identify potential collaboration risks. This is being done through the application of the Institutional Collective Action Frame- work (ICA), which has been developed to identify and address collective action problems that may occur due to fragmented responsibility. Through a qualitative interview study this thesis has highlighted the complex nature of a large-scale crisis and the collaboration risks that follows. The main finding of this study is that the risk of coordination problems increases when a large-scale crisis involves a larger number of actors. Risks of incoordination are manifested in parallel communication channels and parallel networks, that if not identified and managed risks to short- circuit the ordinary collaborative structures in place. Some of the findings in the study may also be of interest for further studies.

Occupational therapy practitioners (OTPs) are reporting low levels of research application in everyday practice, causing a low frequency of evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation (Krueger et al., 2020; Myers, 2019a). A review of the literature demonstrates that individual level factors, such as lack of knowledge, skill, time, and resources for research use, coupled with organizational factors, such as low priority, support, and expectation for EBP, act as barriers to EBP (Wang et al., 2019). This doctoral project aims to build the capacity for research use at both the practitioner and the organization levels through an evidence-based multifaceted intervention program. It will impact the knowledge and skill for understanding and applying research evidence in practice and the frequency of research use in daily practice among school-based occupational therapy practitioners (Sb-OTPs), as well as the organization’s resources, priorities, and environment to support EBP. A mixed-methods design will be used, with a convenience sample of nineteen Sb-OTPs employed at a therapy agency that provides services through contract positions to local school districts. The program consists of four main components of education, provision of resources, working in groups, and organizational supports. The Knowledge-To-Action (KTA) framework (Graham et al., 2009) provides a context-focused iterative process to the program design, from problem identification to sustainability. Continual involvement of all stakeholders, assessment of barriers to tailor the intervention, and adaptation of the knowledge for use in the practice context are KTA-based core program features. The education component is informed by Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) (Bandura, 1986), brain-based learning strategies (Willis, 2006; Yee & Boyd, 2018), and literature supporting blended learning and digital health education formats (Brown et al., 2020; Hew & Lo, 2018; Liu et al., 2016). The program description, implementation, research evaluation plan, and program funding and dissemination are described in detail.

Purpose. The purpose of this dissertation is to understand the state of recommended practice for sedation interruptions (SI) and to discover factors that hinder or facilitate critical care nurses’ use in practice. To garner insight about why this evidence-informed intervention is not being used as recommended to improve mechanically ventilated patient outcomes. Methods. A series of studies using a multi-methods design and guided by the Knowledge to Action Framework: study 1) a systematic review and critical appraisal examined the quality and reporting of all available guidelines and care bundles with recommendations related to SI for mechanically ventilated adults in critical care; study 2) a needs assessment included an environmental scan of the study site and gap-analysis using a retrospective chart audit to measure the nature and magnitude of the evidence-practice gap; study 3) a descriptive qualitative study used semi-structured theory-based interviews to deepen our understanding of the determinants that influence SI use in preparation for a future implementation study. Findings. Study 1 included 11 guidelines and care bundles with 15 recommendations about SI. Deficiencies in the methodological quality of the current guidelines and care bundles may impact overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations, though SI is currently recommended best-practice. Study 2 confirmed the existence of an evidence-practice gap related to SI and affirmed the need to discover barriers and drivers to best practice implementation (study 3). We identified nine facilitators and 20 barriers to SI use by nurses. Facilitators were associated with the innovation (e.g., the importance of protocols) and the potential adopters (e.g., SI are specific to the nurse's role). The barriers were associated with the potential adopters (e.g., nurses’ knowledge gaps and variable goals of SI) and the practice environment (e.g., lack of availability of extra staff and multidisciplinary rounds). Conclusion. Before adequately implementing SI and evaluating uptake by nurses, we need to address modifications to existing guidelines and recommendations, even though SI is considered best practice. A theory-informed implementation study can further activate the use of SI for mechanically ventilated adults in critical care.