|
|  |
User Experience (Usability)
283 hits
| Aug 28, 2003 2:29 pm |
|
re: re: re: Classification Evaluation Method |
Kyle Pero
 | |
Nicholas,
Do you think that it's best to give them a time restraint if they normally wouldn't have one online?
I like to give the user as much time as possible because it's usaually interesting to note the difference between the questions that take no time to answer and the ones they get hung up on. I've noticed that when a user takes awhile to answer a question I can urge them to tell me what they are thinking which results in a lot more feedback. I also notice that when you urge an answer a user will just quickly make a choice instead of saying something like, "I don't know where I can go for that information" or "I'm stuck"... which is great feedback about the architecture.
Let me know what you think about this approach.
Thanks,
Kyle
> Nicholas Gracilla wrote:
>
>I was wondering if anyone has tried a classification evaluation to test labels and taxonomies? It's a low-fidelity method that is done before you even get to the paper prototyping phase. In April I read this "how-to" article on card-based clasification evaluations on boxesandarrows.com and I think it's an invaluable method (http://www.boxesandarrows.com/archives/cardbased_classification_evaluation.php).
>
>
>This is a great article. I was particularly interested in the author's attention to the audience response to the tests.
>
>On a recent test, I was pushing a group of 8 through a web prototype: they had a set of questions, and I'd ask the same questions, keeping them moving along fairly quickly. One person in particular was really upset about this: she wanted to study the site, "soak it in first," and then answer the questions.
>
>But we wanted first impressions and responses. Although I warned folks at the beginning that we might move quickly, she was still dissatisfied.
>
>Nick.Private Reply to Kyle Pero (new win) |
|
