user_test_tra_tj_analysis


 * An Analysis of Test Results

Procedure**

The testing was fairly short in time, allotting approximately 10 minutes per subject, along with an additional 5 minutes to introduce the project, sign the consent forms and to allow them to get comfortable with the environment and evaluation. During the evaluation, we recorded the subjects using a Mac book Pro webcam, and repeatedly reassured the subjects of their rights that their faces would not be recorded and their identity would be protected throughout the entire process. Upon recording, each member of the group read their test script, the subject then carried out the task, and the member would then ask follow up questions. The subjects were not hostile in their comments, and were very truthful in their opinions and criticisms of the website. The results that we gathered were useful in identifying the flaws and reassuring the successful parts of our design. Upon designing the tests, the group maintained anticipation that there would be challenges and surprises. A major challenge the group found was fighting the temptation to point to the screen during testing, or verbally instructing the subject. Moreover, although the group anticipated surprises, it was still very surprising to see how the subjects at times interacted differently than the intended system of interaction.

After completing the tests, we found many facets of the design that worked, and many that would need mending for the final project. The following were comments that arose during the evaluation: Criticisms
 * Findings **
 * The flash applet had to be refreshed, and should be in loop.
 * The choice of font for the events montage (flash) was not visually appealing.

Positive
 * The events page layout was easy to understand, with great visual hierarchy.
 * The events montage (flash) was a powerful and professional tool to give importance to upcoming events.

 Moreover, we acquired answers to the ‘big questions’ concerning the navigation and information structure of the events page. Does the events page and events montage (flash) encourage exploration of the site further? The events montage (flash) was very successful with all subjects in encouraging them to click further and potentially explore. Does the events montage (flash) hinder or help promote exploration of upcoming events? The events montage (flash) helped promote the exploration of upcoming events. This was due to the visual presentation of the information, compared to the typical text-based presentation. Does the visual hierarchy of information allow you to find information (e.g. dates, address, subject) easily? The visual hierarchy of information allowed the subjects to correctly identify the name and subject of the event almost instantly.


 * Reflection**

Upon attending the evaluation and analyzing the findings, I have gained a greater understanding on the significance of user-centered evaluations. I’ve learned that although as a designer I may feel that certain interactions are intuitive and natural, I need to grasp the idea that other users have different methods of thinking, interpreting and interacting with our design. In addition, I’ve learned that the more user-centered testing, the stronger an interactive design can be. During the next interactive project I encounter, I would consider having smaller tests laced throughout the entire building process, to give a stronger, user-crafted prototype for the client.