Usability Test Assessment for Facebook Project Do final usability test assessment for facebook.comThe participant is one userRecord the usability test; sho

Usability Test Assessment for Facebook Project Do final usability test assessment for facebook.comThe participant is one userRecord the usability test; should be under 20 minutes [usability_test__final_assessment for FaceBook.com
[Name of Report Writer]
[Report Date]
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
1
Table of Contents
[insert Table of Contents]
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
2
Introduction
[Include and introduction about the Web site or application and the purpose
of the site.]
For example:
AIDS.gov serves as an information gateway to drive traffic to Federal
domestic HIV/AIDS information and resources. AIDS.gov provides a central
repository of information across government resources providing users easy
access to federal information resources.
A usability test is intended to determine the extent an interface facilitates a
user’s ability to complete routine tasks. Typically the test is conducted with a
group of potential users either in a usability lab, remotely (using e-meeting
software and telephone connection), or on-site with portable equipment.
Users are asked to complete a series of routine tasks. Sessions are recorded
and analyzed to identify potential areas for improvement to the web site.
[Provide a summary about who conducted the test and what they used.
Include a brief summary about the session data.]
For example:
The AIDS.gov usability engineers conducted an onsite usability test using a
live version of AIDS.gov located on the test administrator’s laptop. Two
laptops using Morae software captured the participant’s face, comments,
navigation choices and the data logger’s notes. The test administrator and
data logger were present in the testing room. The session captured each
participant’s navigational choices, task completion rates, comments, overall
satisfaction ratings, questions and feedback.
Executive Summary
[The Executive Summary should describe when and where the usability test
took place. Describe the purpose of the test. Include the number of
participants and the length of the sessions. Provide any additional information
about the test.
Provide a brief overview of the results. Include a glimpse of the overall ease
of use and some of the participant demographic information. Provide a
bulleted list of the problems.
Provide a paragraph describing what is included in the document.]
For example:
The AIDS.gov project team conducted an onsite usability test at the HIV
Prevention Leadership Conference (HPLA) in New Orleans on May 21 st and
May 22nd, 2007. HPLA is the country’s largest HIV/AIDS prevention
conference. The purpose of the test was to assess the usability of the web
interface design, information flow, and information architecture.
Seven conference attendees participated in Test 1 and six in Test 2. Typically,
a total of eight to 10 participants are involved in a usability test to ensure
stable results. Each individual session lasted approximately one hour. Test
scenarios differed over the two test days to meet OMB guidelines.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
3
In general all participants found the AIDS.gov web site to be clear,
straightforward, and 92% thought the web site was easy to use. Ten of the
13 participants (77%) used federal government web sites at least once a
month to find HIV/AIDS information.
The test identified only a few minor problems including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The lack of categorization of topics on the funding pages.
Confusion over apparent duplicative treatment and care
information.
Lack of a fact sheet/brochure category section.
Lack of HIPAA category section.
Lack of a Mental Health category section.
Lack of a site index.
Lack of any categorization of news items on the news page.
Lack of a section for HIV+ data (e.g., number of individuals
infected)
This document contains the participant feedback, satisfactions ratings, task
completion rates, ease or difficulty of completion ratings, time on task, errors,
and recommendations for improvements. A copy of the scenarios and
questionnaires are included in the Attachments’ section.
Methodology
Sessions
[Describe how the participants were recruited. Describe the individual
sessions – length of time and what happened during those sessions. Explain
what the participant was asked to do and what happened post test session.
Describe any pre- or post-test questionnaires. Include the subjective and
overall questionnaires in the attachments’ section.]
For example:
The test administrator contacted and recruited participants via AIDS.gov from
the HPLA conference attendee list. The test administrator sent e-mails to
attendees informing them of the test logistics and requesting their availability
and participation. Participants responded with an appropriate date and time.
Each individual session lasted approximately one hour. During the session,
the test administrator explained the test session and asked the participant to
fill out a brief background questionnaire (see Attachment A). Participants read
the task scenarios and tried to find the information on the website.
After each task, the administrator asked the participant to rate the interface
on a 5-point Likert Scale with measures ranging from Strongly Disagree to
Strongly Agree. Post-task scenario subjective measures included (see
Attachment B):
•
•
•
How easy it was to find the information from the home page.
Ability to keep track of their location in the website.
Accurateness of predicting which section of the website contained the
information.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
4
After the last task was completed, the test administrator asked the participant
to rate the website overall by using a 5-point Likert scale (Strongly Disagree
to Strongly Agree) for eight subjective measures including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ease of use
Frequency of use
Difficulty to keep track of location in website
Learn ability – how easy it would be for most users to learn to use
the website
Information facilitation – how quickly participant could find
information
Look & feel appeal – homepage’s content makes me want to explore
the site further
Site content – site’s content would keep me coming back
Site organization
In addition, the test administrator asked the participants the following overall
website questions:
•
•
•
What the participant liked most.
What the participant liked least.
Recommendations for improvement.
See Attachment C for the subjective and overall questionnaires.
Participants
[Provide a description of the participants. Include the number of participants,
dates and the number of participants on each testing day.
Provide a summary of the results from the demographic/background
questionnaire and display this information in a table.]
For example:
All participants were attendees at the HPLA Conference and HIV/AIDS
community professionals.
Sixteen participants were scheduled over the two testing dates. Thirteen of
the sixteen participants completed the test. Seven participants were involved
in testing on May 21st and six on May 22nd. Of the thirteen participants, six
were male and seven were female.
Role in HIV/AIDS Community
Participants selected their role in the HIV/AIDS community from a general
list. Roles included Federal Agencies, State and Public Health Departments,
grantees, and research institutions. Some participants were involved in
multiple roles.
Example of table
Role
Federal
Staff/Agency
State / Public
Health Department
Federal
Grantee
Medical
Institution
Research
Institution
* Other
Organization
1
3
2
–
2
7
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
5
Evaluation Tasks/Scenarios
[Explain who created the task scenarios. Display the task titles in a bulleted
list.]
For Example
Test participants attempted completion of the following tasks (see Attachment
D for complete test scenarios/tasks and each participant completed a selfdirected task (i.e., a task of their choice) :
• Find a news item about transitional housing in NYC.
• Find federal funding for organizations.
• Find HIV/AIDS positive in-home treatment information.
• Find HIPAA information.
• Find National HIV Testing Day date.
• Find HIV+ veterans brochures.
Results
Task Completion Success Rate
[Explain who recorded the participant’s ability to complete the tasks without
prompting. The task success rate is the number of successes divided by the number of
participants completing the task.
Describe the results by: explaining any task that had 100% completion rates. Follow
this with the tasks that had the next highest completion rates. Then describe the tasks
with the poor completion rates. Display the task completion rates in a table that shows
the participant by task completion rates and the mean rate across task (see example
table).]
For example:
All participants successfully completed Task 1 (find a news item). Six of the
seven (86%) completed Task 5 (find HIV Testing Day). Approximately half
(57%) of participants were able to complete Task 4 (find HIPAA information)
and 29% were able to complete Task 2 (find funding information). None of
the participants were able to complete Task 6 which required them to find
brochures for VA providers and patients.
Task Completion Rates
Participant
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Task 5
Task 6
1
?
–
?
–
?
–
2
?
–
?
?
?
–
3
?
?
?
?
?
–
4
?
?
?
?
?
–
5
?
–
–
–
?
–
6
?
–
–
?
?
–
Success
7
2
5
4
6
0
Completion
Rates
100%
29%
71%
57%
86%
0%
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
6
Task Ratings
After the completion of each task, participants rated the ease or difficult of
completing the task for three factors:
•
•
•
It was easy to find my way to this information from the homepage.
As I was searching for this information, I was able to keep track of
where I was in the website.
I was able to accurately predict which section of the website
contained this information.
The 5-point rating scale ranged from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly
agree). Agree ratings are the agree and strongly agree ratings combined with
a mean agreement ratings of > 4.0 considered as the user agrees that the
information was easy to find, that they could keep track of their location and
predict the section to find the information.
Ease in Finding Information
[Describe the results for this rating variable. Begin with the highest mean
rating tasks followed by the lowest mean rating tasks.]
For example:
All participants agreed it was easy to find treatment information (mean
agreement rating = 4.7) and 86% found it easy to find the HIV Testing day
(mean agreement rating = 4.3). Only 29% of participants found it easy to
find brochures (mean agreement rating = 2.4) and only 43% found it easy to
find funding information (mean agreement rating = 2.9).
Keeping Track of Location in Site
[Describe the results for this rating variable. Begin with the highest mean
rating tasks followed by the lowest mean rating tasks.]
For example:
All the participants found it easy to keep track of their location in the site
while finding treatment information (mean agreement rating = 4.7) and
finding the HIV Testing Day (mean agreement rating = 4.7). In addition, 86%
found it easy to keep track of their location while finding a news item (mean
agreement rating = 4.0). However, only 67% of participants found it easy to
keep track of their location while finding brochures (mean agreement rating =
2.9).
Predicting Information Section
[Describe the results for this rating variable. Begin with the highest mean
rating tasks followed by the lowest mean rating tasks.]
For example:
All the participants agreed it was easy to predict where to find treatment
information (mean agreement rating = 4.7) and 85% agreed it was easy to
predict where to find HIV Testing day information (mean agreement rating =
4.6). However, only 29% agreed that it was easy to predict where to find
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
7
brochures (mean agreement rating = 2.3) and only 44% agreed they could
predict where to find funding information (mean agreement rating = 2.6).
[Display the results in a table (see example tabular display).]
Test 1 – Mean Task Ratings & Percent Agree
Ease –
Finding Info
Location in
Site
Predict
Section
Overall
1 – Find News Item
3.6 (57%)
4.0 (86%)
3.0 (29%)
3.5
2 – Obtain Funding
2.9 (43%)
3.9 (72%)
2.6 (44%)
2.9
4.7 (100%)
4.7 (100%)
4.7 (100%)
4.7
4 – Find FAQ (HIPAA)
3.6 (57%)
3.3 (83%)
3.3 (57%)
3.6
5 – Find Testing Day
4.3 (86%)
4.7 (100%)
4.6 (86%)
4.5
6 – Find Brochures
2.4 (29%)
2.9 (67%)
2.3 (29%)
2.7
Task
3 – Find Treatment Info
*Percent Agree (%) = Agree & Strongly Agree Responses combined
Time on Task
The testing software recorded the time on task for each participant. Some
tasks were inherently more difficult to complete than others and is reflected
by the average time on task.
[Provide a task by task description – include the task title or goal and the
mean time to complete. Provide the range of completion times.]
For example:
Task 6 required participants to find brochures and took the longest time to
complete (mean = 210 seconds). However, completion times ranged from
110 (approximately 2 minutes) to 465 seconds (more than 7 minutes) with
most times less than 200 seconds (less than 4 minutes).
[Display the time data in participant by task table and include the mean total
time by task.]
For example:
Time on Task
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
Avg. TOT*
Task 1
65
95
61
310
210
71
50
123.1
Task 2
130
370
50
200
110
55
390
186.4
Task 3
20
215
15
80
120
30
35
73.6
Task 4
150
65
55
150
180
67
240
129.6
Task 5
43
127
29
60
79
30
115
69.0
Task 6
146
110
120
465
130
175
325
210.1
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
8
Errors
[Insert who captured the errors here] captured the number of errors
participants made while trying to complete the task scenarios.
[Describe the task in which participants made the most errors. Describe any
tasks that were made without a non-critical error. Provide the results in a
table showing number of errors by participant and task. ] A non-critical error
is an error that does not prevent successful completion of the scenario.
Summary of Data
The table below displays a summary of the test data. Low completion rates
and satisfaction ratings and high errors and time on tasks are highlighted in
red.
For example:
Summary of Completion, Errors, Time on Task, Mean Satisfaction
Task
1
2
3
4
5
6
Task Completion
7
2
5
4
6
0
Errors
4
10
2
9
3
14
Time on Task
123
186
74
130
69
210
Satisfaction*
3.52
2.90
4.70
3.57
4.52
2.67
* Satisfaction = Mean combined rating across three post-task measures: ease of finding the information,
ability to keep track of location in site, and site information prediction accuracy.
Overall Metrics
Overall Ratings
After task session completion, participants rated the site for eight overall
measures (See Attachment insert attachment letter here). These measures
include:
• Ease of use
• Frequency of use
• Difficulty of keeping track of where they were in the site
• How quickly most people would learn to use the site
• Getting information quickly
• Homepage’s content facilities exploration
• Relevancy of site content
• Site organization
[Describe the highest percent of ‘agreed’ satisfaction ratings first. Combine
the strongly agree and agreed ratings into an agreed ratings. Then describe
the variables that received the lowest satisfaction ratings. Display the results
in a table]
For example:
Most of the participants (92%) agreed (i.e., agree or strongly agree) that the
website was easy to use. The majority of participants (85%) agreed they
would use the site frequently and that the site’s content would keep them
coming back. Even though participants’ average agreement rating was 3.9,
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
9
only 54% (due to 5 neutral and 5 strongly agree responses) agreed that the
homepage’s content would make them want to explore the site.
See table below.
Post-Task Overall Questionnaire
Strongly
Disagree
Thought Website
was easy to use
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
1
12
Would use website
2
6
frequently
Found it difficult to
keep track of
3
6
3
1
where they were in
website
Thought most
people would learn
5
8
to use website
quickly
Can get
1
2
8
information quickly
Homepage’s
content makes me
1
5
2
want to explore
site
Site’s content
would keep me
2
6
coming back
Website is well
5
6
organized
*Percent Agree (%) = Agree & Strongly Agree Responses combined
Strongly
Agree
Mean
Rating
Percent
Agree
3.9
92%
4.2
85%
2.1
8%
3.6
62%
2
3.9
77%
5
3.9
54%
5
4.2
85%
2
3.8
62%
5
4.6.2 Likes, Dislikes, Participant Recommendations
Upon completion of the tasks, participants provided feedback for what they
liked most and least about the website, and recommendations for improving
the website.
Liked Most
The following comments capture what the participants liked most:
[insert liked most comments here]
Liked Least
The following comments capture what the participants liked the least:
[insert liked least comments here]
Recommendations for Improvement
[insert recommendations here]
Recommendations
The recommendations section provides recommended changes and
justifications driven by the participant success rate, behaviors, and
comments. Each recommendation includes a severity rating. The following
recommendations will improve the overall ease of use and address the areas
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services – 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. – Washington, D.C. 20201
10
where participants experienced problems or found the interface/information
architecture unclear.
[Provide the task title and an overview of the task. In a table, present the
change, justification for the change and the severity rating for the change. Do
this for each recommendation]
For example:
Find Organizational or Individual Funding Information (Task 2)
Task 2 required participants to find organization funding (Test 1) or individual funding (Test 2).
Change
Justification
• Add categories to funding
pages.
Participants across both tests rated the ease of
finding funding information with 2.9 (out of 5) and
only 38% agreed that it was easy to find funding
information.
• Add additional descriptive
text on funding Opportunities
home page.
Severity
High
Funding information is not categorized and
requires users to read through all the funding
opportunities to find one of interest.
Participant comments also included categorizing
funding in a more concise manner so it is easier to
find.
Conclusion
[Provide a short conclusion paragraph. Begin with an overall statement of
what the participants found and what is key about the Web site/application].
Implementing the recommendations and continuing to work with users (i.e.,
real lay persons) will ensure a continued user-centered website.
For example:
Most of the participants found AIDS.gov to be well-organized, comprehensive,
clean and uncluttered, very useful, and easy to use. Having a centralized site
to find information is key to many if not all of the participants. Implementing
the recommendations and continuing to work with users (i.e., real lay
persons) will ensure a continued user-centered website.
[Add Attachments. Attachments may include: Attachment A – Background
Questionnaire, Attachment B – Post-Task Questionnaire, Attachment C – Postsession Overall Subjective Q…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment