Archiv

Artikel Tagged ‘Discount’

UserTesting: Quick&Dirty Usability Testing

UserTesting: Remote Usability Testing

UserTesting: Remote Usability Testing

Habe hier ein weiteres Remote Testing Tool gefunden. Hierbei handelt es sich zwar auch um einen unmoderiertes Testverfahren d.h. asynchron, die Vorteile jedoch: Es werdern Tonaufzeichnungen gemacht und die Probanden kommen direkt aus einem Panel.
Der Nachteil: So wie ich das sehe können nur amerikanische Probanden herangezogen werden.
Für das ein oder andere internationale Projekt sicherlich interssant. Insbesondere deswegen, da ein Proband nur ca 30 Dollar kostet.

Das Tool/den Anbieter findet man hier: http://www.usertesting.com/

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

5 Sekunden Schnelltest

Ein sehr interessanter Discount-Usability-Test Ansatz gibt es von UIE.
Bei diesem kurzen Usability-Test bekommen die Probanden die zu testende Seite (bevorzugt Startseiten) nur 5 Sekunden zu sehen. Dies entspricht der durchschnittlichen Erstkontaktdauer. Die Probanden müssen dann im Anschluss aussagen, wie Sie den Task bewältigt hätten. Eine Methode die ich mir sehr gut im Internet vorstellen könnte (terminierter Picture-Viewer oder in Form eines Live Tests bzw. synchronen Remote Usability-Tests).

Nach kurzer Recherche habe ich auch einen solchen Dienst gefunden: http://www.fivesecondtest.com/

Hier ist es möglich Screenshots hochzuladen und aus 3 vorgegebenen Testmethoden auszuwählen. Für schnelle und kostengünstige Datenerhebungen bestimmt äußerst interessant.

Hier noch ein Auszug zur Methode an sich:

As we often do in other types of usability tests, we start by giving users a focused task. For the Donation page, we gave users a simple task:

“You’re ready to donate to the Red Cross organization. But you’re unsure of what kind of donation to make. What are your donation options?”

Next, before we show the user our page, we tell them we’ll only display it for 5 seconds. We ask them to try to remember everything they see in this short period.

Once the user views the entire page for 5 seconds, we remove it by either covering it up or switching to another window. Then, we ask them to write down everything they remember about the page. When they finish jotting down their recollections, we ask two useful questions to assess whether users accomplished the task. For the Donations page, we’d ask, “What is the most important information on this page?” and “How would you go about donating to the Red Cross?”

Analyzing the Results

By paying careful attention to users’ initial impressions, we can identify whether the content page is clear and concise. If the page is understandable, users will easily recall the critical content and accurately identify the page’s main purpose…

The Benefits of 5-Second Testing

Limiting the viewing time to 5 seconds, we get a valuable glimpse into what happens during the first moments a user sees a page. When we give users more than 5 seconds to study the page, we’ve found they start looking at the page more like a designer, noticing details they would normally miss or misinterpret.

Frequently, we’ll conduct 5-Second Tests with paper mock-ups or low-fidelity electronic prototypes, such as PDFs or Photoshop page renditions. We can test very early in the development cycle, long before the team builds a functional web site. Often, this early insight can help point out site-wide information design requirements, saving much redesign work down the road.

One of the 5-Second Test’s biggest advantages is how quick it is. When evaluating the Donation page, each user took only 10 minutes! Because this technique is quick and easy to implement, it is perfect to run in locations where we can gather many users at one time, such as trade shows, conferences, and the company cafeteria. We can gather large amounts of user data in a short time.

Den ganzen Artikel gibt es hier.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Card-Sorting Online VS vor Ort

Hier eine Vergleich der beiden Methoden, dessen Aussagen ich auch teile.

Part of the appeal of card sorting today is that researchers have the option of conducting studies either online or in person. When using an online tool, large numbers of participants can complete the exercise, lending additional statistical weight to the findings. In some organizations, the large sample size and statistical basis of online card sorting is helpful in dealing with decision makers. In-person card sorts let researchers interact with participants and ask probing questions to determine their organizational strategies, as well as other follow-up questions. A number of resources are available online that provide detailed steps on running and analyzing studies in both contexts.

Den ganzen Artikel gibt es hier:
Extending Card-Sorting Techniques to Inform the Design of Web Site Hierarchies :: UXmatters

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Usability Tests müssen nicht immer dem Lehrbuch entsprechen

Sehr tolle Methode um schnell sehr viele Meinungen zu erhalten bzw. schnell Daten zu erheben, um Designentscheidungen nicht aus dem Bauch heraus zu treffen:

Even if teams don’t do classic usability tests, they still need insights on which to base design decisions.

The secret to usability testing in the wild is that you can conduct usability tests following the basic methodology, just less formally. Call it Usability Testing Lite: sit next to someone using a design and watch them. Teams that do testing in the wild don’t need a lab. They don’t usually record anything. But they do have everyone on the team fully present, with at least one other person from the team in each session held with a user.

They conduct sessions in cafes, or malls, trade shows, or street fairs, even their own reception areas — anywhere the users might be — and ask nicely for a few minutes of time to try out something new.

These are quick, cheap, and insightful sessions. And since these smart teams were able to gather a few insights in a few days rather than a few weeks, they just do another round as soon as they can. They repeat the steps until they start to see trends. Then adjust as more questions come up. The thinking of the best teams is, how could having some insights be worse than doing nothing?

At least they got out of the office, maybe got a reality check on some small part of a design, and started to make a case for having more contact with users. Sounds better than opinion wars to me.

Den ganzen Artikel zur nicht ganz methodenreinen aber sicherlich effizienten Methode findet man hier:
Quick and Dirty Usability Testing: Step Away from the Book

  • Share/Save/Bookmark