An approach for graphical user interface bad smells detection

In the context of an e ort to develop methodologies to support the evaluation of interactive system, this paper investigates an approach to detect graphical user interface bad smells. Our approach consists in detecting user interface bad smells through model-based reverse engineering from source code. Models are used to de ne which widgets are present in the interface, when can particular graphical user interface (GUI) events occur, under which conditions, which system actions are executed, and which GUI state is generated next.

Towards a Catalog of Usability Smells

This paper presents a catalog of smells in the context of interactive applications. These so-called usability smells are indicators of poor design on an application’s user interface, with the potential to hinder not only its usability but also its maintenance and evolution. To eliminate such usability smells we discuss a set of program/usability refactorings. In order to validate the presented usability smells catalog, and the associated refactorings, we present a preliminary empirical study with software developers in the context of a real open source hospital management application. Moreover, a tool that computes graphical user interface behavior models, giving the applications’ source code, is used to automatically detect usability smells at the model level.

Performance of european socially responsible funds during market crises: evidence from France

This paper investigates the performance, investment styles andmanagerial abilities of French socially responsible investment (SRI) funds investing in Europe during crisis and non-crisis periods. Our results show that SRI funds significantly underperformcharacteristics-matched conventional funds during non-crisis periods, but match the performance of their peers duringmarket downturns. The underperformance of SRI funds during good economic states is driven by funds that use negative screens, since funds that use only positive screens performsimilarly to conventional funds across differentmarket conditions. SRI and conventional funds showsignificant differences in risk exposures during non-crisis periods but exhibit much more similar investment styles during crises. Furthermore,we find little evidence of significant differences inmanagerial abilities during bad economic states. Yet, during non-crisis periods, SRI and conventional fund managers exhibit significantly different style-timing abilities and these differences are also related to screening strategies.