conversations.from: human
conversations.value: What could be a title for a book about HCI, Human-Computer, Interaction with the genre: Computers & Technology, Computer Science?
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: A title for this book could be 'Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction'
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: the first paragraph for this book. End with the sentence ' So instead of saying, "how many users must you have?," maybe the correct question is "how many users can we afford?," "how many users can we get?" or "how many users do we have time for?"'.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction
  The reality is that most usability testing will never uncover all, or even most, of the usability flaws. And even if all of the flaws were uncovered, most of them will never be fixed. Instead, the goal should be to find the major flaws, the flaws that will cause most problems, and get them fixed. From an industry point of view, the exercise of finding flaws, without the consideration of whether they can be fixed, is not of value (Wixon, 2003). It simply would not make sense to expend all of the available "usability time" in a development lifecycle on finding flaws, rather than balancing time between finding flaws and fixing flaws. It may be useful to examine the effectiveness of various usability testing methods. But in industry, usability testing logistics are often driven not by what should or needs to be done, but instead, on how much time is left in the development process, how much money has been set aside by management for usability testing, and how many users are available and willing to participate. For instance, in usability testing on the website of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, the usability engineer identified 16 different user populations for the website. But after the prototype of the new website was built, the budget only allowed for usability testing with school-based, speech-language pathologists, the largest group of users for the website (Lazar, 2006). So instead of saying, "how many users must you have?," maybe the correct question is "how many users can we afford?," "how many users can we get?" or "how many users do we have time for?"
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: four more paragraphs
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Costanza E, Inverso SA, Allen R, Maes P. Intimate interfaces in action: assessing the usability and subtlety of EMG-based motionless gestures. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, California, USA. New York: ACM; 2007;29–36.
  Crowe EC, Narayanan NH. Comparing interfaces based on what users watch and do. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, United States. New York: ACM;.
  Cutrell E, Guan Z. What are you looking for?: an eye-tracking study of information usage in web search. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, California, USA. New York: ACM; 2007;407–416.
  Demmans C, Subramanian S, Titus J. Posture monitoring and improvement for laptop use. In: CHI '07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA. New York: ACM; 2007;2357–2362.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: the last four paragraphs
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Trewin S, Marques D, Guerreiro T. Usage of subjective scales in accessibility research. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility. 2015;59–67.
  Vogler C, Tucker P, Williams N. Mixed local and remote participation in teleconferences from a deaf and hard of hearing perspective. In: Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2013;30–34.
  Yaneva V, Temnikova I, Mitkov R. Accessible texts for autism: an eye-tracking study. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility. 2015;49–57.
  Zhao Y, Szpiro S, Azenkot S. ForeSee: a customizable head-mounted vision enhancement system for people with low vision. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility. 2015;239–249.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Swap the first and the last sentence.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: 2015;239–249. Usage of subjective scales in accessibility research. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility. 2015;59–67.
  Vogler C, Tucker P, Williams N. Mixed local and remote participation in teleconferences from a deaf and hard of hearing perspective. In: Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2013;30–34.
  Yaneva V, Temnikova I, Mitkov R. Accessible texts for autism: an eye-tracking study. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility. 2015;49–57.
  Zhao Y, Szpiro S, Azenkot S. ForeSee: a customizable head-mounted vision enhancement system for people with low vision. In: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility.Trewin S, Marques D, Guerreiro T.