{"id":"W1995872983","doi":"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.11.001","title":"Methods for inclusion: Employing think aloud protocols in software usability studies with individuals who are deaf","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","topic":"Hearing Impairment and Communication","field":"Psychology","cited_by":57,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"Toronto Metropolitan University; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Usability; Cognitive walkthrough; Think aloud protocol; Computer science; Software walkthrough; Protocol (science); Inclusion (mineral); Human–computer interaction; Gesture; Usability inspection; Usability lab; Protocol analysis; Pluralistic walkthrough; Multimedia; Software; Psychology; Usability engineering; Software development; Artificial intelligence","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.1246965,0.003390702,0.003514252,0.006634639,0.008026336,0.005399154,0.004072113,0.003780699,0.01495922],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2915013,0.004158392,0.002408001,0.003583351,0.00233517,0.005544262,0.007840253,0.004238571,0.005095453],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002467212,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01689603,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001248693,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004293766,"domain_scores_codex":[0.8707871,0.07979695,0.02478713,0.005588274,0.01631214,0.002728352],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7301994,0.1394822,0.01540506,0.03035676,0.08191396,0.002642686],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00640464,0.008699525,0.01463325,0.02211542,0.0003367451,0.0008146174,0.1982548,0.0006972664,0.02369518,0.006665239,0.02301957,0.6946638],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.03327838,0.03246428,0.1506268,0.03179611,0.002986691,0.002434559,0.2017297,0.01764859,0.15888,0.05818615,0.3072067,0.002761982],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"protocol","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1824926,0.00104008,0.2134362,0.002220966,0.002257213,0.5745999,0.001992396,0.001678567,0.02028209],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.05451387,0.0003300718,0.1705888,0.0005277708,0.0001560571,0.7702363,0.0003789424,0.0002276509,0.003040517],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1246965,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6594659,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.1892601943180626,"score_gpt":0.544539705143206,"score_spread":0.3552795108251434,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}