#20859
International Usability Testing
Although products are commonly used in countries other than the one they were designed for, designers often forget to consider different usage circumstances. International use of the Web is particularly common since users can access pages from all over the world with a single click.
Nielsen, Jakob. Alertbox (1996). Articles>Usability>Methods>International
#18619
Interviews and focus groups let you query users about their experiences and preferences with your product. Both are formal, structured events where you directly interact with users, asking them to voice their opinions and experiences regarding your product.
#19040
Is A Lab Essential For User Testing?
Once an organisation decides to go ahead with a user testing programme, the questions really begin. Is it really necessary to undertake testing in a 'usability lab'? And what exactly should a fully functioning lab consist of anyway? As one might imagine, opinion is divided on these issues. We take a quick look at what a typical lab might consist of and the pros and cons of lab-based testing.
Farrell, Tom. Frontend Infocentre (2001). Articles>Usability>Testing>Methods
#23913
Iterative Design of ESR Web Site with Lightweight Remote Usability Evaluations 
The IBM Ease of Use team designed a lightweight remote usability evaluation method and successfully used it in a series of iterative design activities for the IBM Electronic Service Request (ESR) Web pages. User satisfaction increased remarkably within a short time during the iterative design process. The results of this project proved the feasibility and effectiveness of the lightweight remote usability evaluation method being used.
Dong, Jianming. IBM (2004). Articles>Usability>Methods
#15003
Iterative Usability Research Methods: Why Testing Isn't Enough
Discusses how to choose different usability methods for iterative research. Slides only.
Rosenbaum, Stephanie L. Tec-Ed, Inc. (1999). Articles>Usability>Testing>Methods
#28023
Iterative Usability Testing as Continuous Feedback: A Control Systems Perspective 
This paper argues that in the field of usability, debates about number of users, the use of statistics, etc. in the abstract are pointless and even counter-productive. We propose that the answers depend on the research questions and business objectives of each project and thus cannot be discussed in absolute terms. Sometimes usability testing is done with an implicit or explicit hypothesis in mind. At other times the purpose of testing is to guide iterative design. These two approaches call for different study designs and treatment of data. We apply control systems theory to the topic of usability to highlight and frame the value of iterative usability testing in the design lifecycle. Within this new metaphor, iterative testing is a form of feedback which is most effective and resource-efficient if done as often as practically possible with project resources and timelines in mind.
Genov, Alex. Journal of Usability Studies (2006). Articles>Usability>Testing>Methods
#18622
Journaled sessions bridges usability inquiry, where you ask people about their experiences with a product, and usability testing, where you observe people experiencing the product's user interface. Journaled sessions are often used as a remote inquiry method for software user interface evaluation. A disk is distributed to a number of test subjects containing a prototype of the software product, as well as additional code to capture (or journalize) the subjects' actions when using the prototype. Users perform several tasks with the prototype, much as in formal usability tests, and their actions are captured with the journalizing software. Upon completion of the series of tasks, the users return the disks to you for you to evaluate. Because the journaling portion of the evaluation is largely automated, this approach to remote, hands-off inquiry is certainly more 'usable' then self-reporting logging, where users are requested to write down their observations and comments and send them back to you.
#21765
#27444
What you buy or 'buy into' influences how you think about something and how you represent that information in your mind is what cognitive scientists refer to as an 'internal representation'. Whether you buy usability services or not, at some point along the way I am sure you will or have encountered 'methodology madness', and maybe you don't even know it.
Spillers, Frank. Demystifying Usability (2004). Articles>Usability>Methods>Cognitive Psychology
#19194
Methods and Guidelines to Avoid Common Questionnaire Bloopers
Over the years, I’ve often heard colleagues say 'let’s throw a questionnaire together and find out what our users think about our product.' Implicit in this statement is the assumption that questionnaires are easy to design, administer, and analyze. This assumption is far from the truth.
Wilson, Chauncey E. Usability Interface (2003). Articles>Usability>Methods>Surveys
#21162
Es una prueba de usabilidad que se basa en la observación y análisis de cómo un grupo de usuarios reales utiliza el sitio web, anotando los problemas de uso con los que se encuentran para poder solucionarlos posteriormente. Se trata de una prueba llevada a cabo en 'laboratorio', es decir, no debemos confundirla con un estudio de campo.
Hassan Montero, Yusef and Francisco Jesus Martin Fernandez. Nosolousabilidad.com (2003). (Spanish) Articles>Usability>Methods
#29403
Mobile Essentials: Field Study and Concepting
This paper describes a cross-cultural field study of what people consider to be mobile essentials, how those mobile essentials are carried and problems typically encountered.
Chipchase, Jan, Per Persson, Petri Piippo, et al. uiGarden (2007). Articles>Usability>Ethnographies>Methods
#30198
Multiple-User Simultaneous Testing (MUST)
Testing 5-10 users at once lets you conduct large-scale usability testing and still meet your deadlines.
Nielsen, Jakob. Alertbox (2007). Articles>Usability>Testing>Methods
#14999
Multiple-User Testing: When One Person Can't See Everything
Describes the pros and cons of the methods used in designing two usability tests where constraints prevented observation of all participants by one person.
Kantner, Laurie, Deborah Hinderer and Connie Leas. Tec-Ed, Inc. (1997). Articles>Usability>Methods
#25902
We love a good detective novel, so it is no surprise that the sometimes mysterious nature in which market research operates gives us a similar kick. As the great Sherlock Holmes poses the endless questions for his unfortunate sidekick, Watson, it behooves us to do the same in our line of work: What is the ultimate goal of the ubiquitously mysterious end-client? Who will benefit from this study? Who ultimately has the means, the motive and the opportunity to participate?
Lundgren, Lauren and Tina Osinski. Usability Professionals Association (2005). Articles>Usability>Methods
#14990
Not Just a Hammer: When and How to Employ Multiple Methods in Usability Programs
Why should usability programs incorporate many kinds of methodology to influence corporate decision-making? This paper describes what makes successful multiple-method usability programs. It discusses when to apply each method and how to justify usability programs to management.
Rosenbaum, Stephanie L. Tec-Ed, Inc. (2002). Articles>Usability>Methods
#25747
Usability testing is increasingly popular and effective for guiding Web site redesign. However, like any method, it has limitations, including a narrow focus at the expense of larger contexts. Analyzing Web sites with other techniques, including 1) rhetorical analysis based on research in rhetoric, design, and content of similar texts, and 2) content analysis based on matching Web content to an organization’s goals for its Web sites, can yield additional information. This information, which traditional usability tests don’t provide, can help designers better create Web sites. Web designers should not rely exclusively upon usability testing to provide information about Web site design, but instead should also examine how the sites invoke the audiences that they desire to reach.
McGovern, Heather. Technical Communication Online (2005). Articles>Usability>Methods
#23043
Observing the User Experience: A Practitioner’s Guide to User Research
With all the attention to usability over the last five years or so and the wonderful swelling of information-architecture-related books just since 2001, you would think we would have enough methods and advice to keep our projects in perfect tack. But so many of these resources, excellent though they are, tend to be more about how to pilot the ship than how to find that all-important star and keep it in sight.
Hinton, Andrew. Boxes and Arrows (2004). Articles>Usability>Methods
#29869
Online Surveys for the STC Carolina Chapter and Usability SIG
This paper discusses the processes used to develop two online STC surveys: the 'Employment and Salary Survey' conducted by the STC Carolina Chapter, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, and the 'Member Survey' conducted by the STC Usability SIG. Both surveys were available during the winter of 2003. This paper also highlights results from these surveys to demonstrate findings that online surveys can provide. Throughout this paper, we offer suggestions that other groups can apply to their survey efforts, including working methods to employ, types of questions to ask, ways to increase response rates, and approaches to verify and describe the respondent sample.
Kleid, Naomi A. STC Proceedings (2004). Articles>Usability>Methods>Surveys
#29623
An Orientation to Eye Tracking in Usability Studies
Eye tracking (ET) is a technique for capturing eye movements as a person looks at a computer interface. It provides insight into where a person is looking, for how long, and in what order. In usability testing, ET can help testers evaluate the quality of a website or software design based on the user’s eye activity. In this paper, we introduce you to ET and its application in usability. We identify questions that ET can answer, describe how it works, summarize some of the research in ET, and discuss its benefits and drawbacks in usability testing. with an eye tracker for usability testing. This process is specific to the ET hardware (ERICA) and software (GazeTracker) used in the Laboratory of Usability Testing in the Department of Technical Communication at the University of Washington (UWTC LUTE).
Chin, Crystal, Shirley Lee, and Judith Ramey. STC Proceedings (2005). Articles>Usability>Methods>Eye Tracking
#27941
Outliers and Luck in User Performance
6% of task attempts are extremely slow and constitute outliers in measured user performance. These sad incidents are caused by bad luck that designers can -- and should -- eradicate.
Nielsen, Jakob. Alertbox (2006). Articles>Usability>Testing>Methods
#26763
Personas are a documented set of archetypal users who are involved with a product, typically the product's users. Each persona has a name and a picture. They're supposed to give designers a sense that they are designing for specific people, not just generic, ill-defined users. Done well, this is exactly what personas do. The problem is, most teams build personas from the wrong kind of user information, or worse, base them on assumptions.
Saffer, Dan. Adaptive Path (2005). Articles>Usability>Methods>Personas
#22670
Personas: Setting the Stage for Building Usable Information Sites
Personas are hypothetical archetypes, or 'stand-ins' for actual users that drive the decision making for interface design projects. Personas are not real people, but they represent real people throughout the design process. Personas are not 'made up'; they are discovered as a by-product of the investigative process.
Head, Alison J. Online Magazine (2003). Articles>Usability>Methods>Personas
#18628
Pluralistic walkthroughs are meetings where users, developers, and usability professionals step through a task scenario, discussing and evaluating each element of interaction. Group walkthroughs have the advantage of providing a diverse range of skills and perspectives to bear on usability problems. As with any inspection, the more people looking for problems, the higher the probablility of finding problems. Also, the interaction between the team during the walkthrough helps to resolve usability issues faster.
#28588
How Community Manager Karen Bachmann has learned about the power and importance of storytelling, and some of the many stories that have deeply affected her.
Bachmann, Karen L. Usability Interface (2007). Articles>Usability>Methods
