1. The Information School of the University of Washington Information System Design Info-440 Autumn 2002 Session #20

2. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 2 Agenda Feedback on Assignment #4 Usability engineering life-cycle –Some highlights

3. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 3 Announcements Visio lab – 430 –Monday, Dec 9 th, 3:30 – 4:30 –If you have specific questions, please send them to me Class action law suite on FUI banner ads –http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134590896_webad06.htmlhttp://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134590896_webad06.html –Thanks to Jeff Towle Anyone?

4. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 4 Upcoming Return assignment #4 on Wednesday Interactive Prototyping Project –Friday, Dec 13, Noon (or earlier)

5. The Information School of the University of Washington Assignment #4

6. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 6 Heuristic evaluation: Some considerations Background. Include something about –What you looked at and why –Connection speed and size of display –How long it took you

7. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 7 Heuristic evaluation: Some considerations In general, –Avoid first person “I think x” and “In my personal opinion I believe x” –Use images –Write for ease of scanning –Refer to guideline(s) that have been violated –Include a severity indicator –Be succinct

8. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 8 Example #1 Issue #1: Use of family metaphor for presenting help Severity: 2 Throughout the site a family is used to explain how the features work. While this is an interesting metaphor, it is likely to be unfamiliar to the site’s audience. There is significant risk that this approach will not work because a) Images ad visual clutter, which are likely to be ignored, and are sometimes positioned as if they are right-side ads; b) Images compete for attention with text on error messages; and c) The ‘help’ information in these messages is disassociated from the display and is often difficult to understand. Guidelines violated: Minimize visual clutter; Speak in users language; Use metaphors appropriately.

9. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 9 Example #2 Issue #2: Getting help after a failed search Severity: 2 When a search fails, for whatever reason, the image to the right is shown. This image indicates that an error occurred but does not explain the error or give useful information for fixing the problem. Also, note that nothing indicates that this image can be clicked. Guidelines violated: Provide actionable error messages; Clickable things should appear clickable.

10. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 10 Some final considerations Use a table to summarize your findings. An example that shows UE severity and difficulty of fixing UEFix IssueSeverityDifficulty Use of family metaphor for presenting help21 Getting help after a failed search 23 ……… Single issues can violate multiple guidelines Nielsen's guidelines are targeted to GUI applications (not the web)

11. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 11

12. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 12

13. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 13

14. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 14 Task analysis Even very simple goals can very *very* complicated to document

15. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 15 Usability evaluation Participants + Good to include a little background (age, education/job, how the web is used, etc.) - what does this mean: 'fairly competent with x'? - what does this mean: 'blue collar worker'? + Better: o Years online: X o Hr/week: X o familiarity with task: X o familiarity with website: X

16. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 16 Usability evaluation Participants -Never include ‘real’ names of participants -Don’t include demographic information such as race and nationality unless its relevant to your work

17. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 17 Findings/reflection Hard to not interrupt and explain Observing and taking notes is hard Patience is very important Finding the "right words" to keep participants going Some users spent more time thinking aloud than others Individual differences in users Unexpected behaviors & learned new things Participants would have gone elsewhere if they were working on their own Browser differences (site works differently on different browsers) Even this simple task, requires a great deal of planning and careful attention to detail

18. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 18 Findings/reflection Developed conjectures with heuristic eval. that were confirmed (or not) in usability evaluation Complementary findings with heuristic and usability evaluation (little overlap) to each other Be careful on drawing firm conclusions (limited data) Coverage (usability: narrow; heuristic eval: broad) In a heuristic evaluation there is risk of being overly critical Discussion of tactical differences: Scan & browse VS. Search Contextual factors that influence decisions on which method to use One breakdown, when online, can cause a very significant impact When there is an form with multiple input fields they fill them all in Input fields that are in close proximity are thought to be associated

19. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 19

20. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 20 Summative results Only 6 data sets were submitted Very tentative results (Please submit your data)

21. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 21 Time (seconds) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Telephone 1 2 Newspaper Web Trial Comparison of three media for ‘Find movie time for move, M, between 6-9pm on this Thursday’

22. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 22 Average times in seconds (n=6) NewspaperTelephoneWeb Trial 17810288 Trial 2518373

23. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 23 Final message Even trivial tasks can be surprisingly complex You found significant issues on the best sites on the Web Running great usability studies takes practice –Break it down into steps: Scenario, task analysis, heuristic evaluation and usability evaluation You know enough to learn on your own and do great work!

24. The Information School of the University of Washington Usability life-cycle questions

25. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 25 Questions from Nielsen

26. The Information School of the University of Washington Case: Left navigation

27. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 27 Case summary Visual design says: –“I have to alternatives for how the left navigation should work. Which one is better?” What do you think should be done?

28. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 28 The page layout

29. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 29 Left Nav: Alternative #1

30. The Information School of the University of Washington Copyright David Hendry (INFO-440 session 20 - 12/09/2002) 30 Left Nav: Alternative #2

31. The Information School of the University of Washington Let’s work the case