É possível se colocar no lugar do outro? um estudo experimental investigando a compatibilidade entre estilos cognitivos e as personas do GenderMag

Abstract

The GenderMag method makes it possible to identify usability problems related to gender inclusion through the use of cognitive personas. However, it remains underexplored to what extent evaluators are truly able to “incorporate” these personas when conducting inspections. This study aimed to analyze the correlation between evaluators’ actual cognitive profiles and their influence on the use of the personas Abby and Tim during a usability inspection. A mixed-methods experiment was conducted with 27 undergraduate Computer Science students enrolled in a Human–Computer Interaction course at a federal public university in Paraná, Brazil. Initially, participants completed a characterization questionnaire and the GenderMag Facets Survey, which was used to classify them into profiles more closely aligned with either Abby or Tim. Subsequently, they performed two usability inspections of a file-submission scenario in Moodle, one while adopting Abby’s perspective and another while adopting Tim’s, followed by a post-test questionnaire. Quantitative data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk and Mann–Whitney U tests, while open-ended responses were examined using Thematic Analysis. The results showed statistically significant differences between the groups when the inspection was conducted with the Abby persona, but not with Tim, indicating that participants found it easier to represent Tim and experienced greater difficulty distancing themselves from their own context when representing Abby. These findings demonstrate that evaluators’ cognitive profiles influence the application of the GenderMag method and may affect the consistency of inspections, highlighting the need for improved training, refinement of personas, and additional support for using the method in inclusive design contexts.