User testing is a great way to discover problems with your website or program. Reasons why a great usability expert will often recommend to do an individual evaluation.
1. Experts do not know everything
No matter how much expert knowledge and experience you have, you can't know everything.
You can not always judge situations perfectly. That's a lesson I've learned in more than 17 years as a usability specialist. You may read more about that topic in our post'Experts don't know everything, not usability experts'.
2. Facts trump opinions
In a conversation, bring facts as your weapon of choice.
Clients may easily dismiss expert advice with the debate"Yeah sure, but that's just your own personal opinion, right?" .
User evaluations show details.
And facts trump opinions every day of the week.
3. Ignoring your clients is tough
Or , ignoring your own clients is much more difficult to do than dismissing expert guidance.
In case you have seen with your eyes that 5 out of 6 people have difficulty working with the filter navigation on your webshop, there is no way you can not realize this is a problem you need to repair.
User testing generates empathy with your customers. If they're struggling on your website, I can tell you that's very painful to watch. You have to share in that struggle.
4. Convincing and durable proof
A movie that shows your clients and potential customers having trouble with your website, cursing your interface?
That's immense power. That kind of video will close up the most die hard, ego-tripping know-it-all experts and supervisors during board meetings.
Additionally, you can re-use the recordings at any phase of the job. Whenever the exact same old discussion rears its ugly head again, you simply whip out that recording:"Remember this is exactly what we saw during user testing...".
Keep hammering on that nail.
Most common kinds of user testing
1. Moderated user testing
Launching a website with no user testing is like playing Russian roulette. Tweet this quotation
The classic consumer evaluation set-up is in-person moderated user testing. The moderator sits next to the test participant and asks questions.
This old-school method still has a lot of advantages. Observing the user in person and having the ability to ask them additional questions based on what they're doing or saying in a specific point, can provide you very deep insights into what's really wrong with a web site.
To me, this really is priceless information. Plus it can not be replicated by another method. There are some things you simply can not escape from mouse clicks and scroll maps.
Having said this, great moderating abilities are obviously key in moderated user testing. The way the moderator asks the questions and even only the way she sits or looks at the consumer can heavily affect your evaluation results.
2. Remote moderated user analysing
The largest drawback of this'classic' in-person user evaluation is that your test participants either have to come to you or you need to visit them. And time is only cash.
Remote moderated user testing is an excellent alternative for in-person user testing. Tweet this quotation
With remote user tests, the moderator and evaluation participant may be where they wish to be, as seem as they're looking at the same site on some display or alternative. Together with screen sharing software that's a bit of cake nowadays.
If your user has a webcam, you can also see their face. Making it a fantastic alternative for in-person moderated consumer testing.
We use GoToMeeting for remote moderated consumer testing. The moderator can see the user's screen, as well as their face. This random test participant isn't very pleased with KBC Bank's homepage.
We frequently do distant moderated testing if we need test participants from various nations. Additionally, it is a great solution in the event that you only wish to check something small: one particular page or a measure in a procedure.
3. Remote unmoderated user testing
As you probably already guessed, there's absolutely no moderator in this kind of testing.
There are just two main variations of remote unmoderated user analyzing where you have footage of this test participant's actions on your website in Addition to feedback:
Recorded image and audio
Clients are requested to think out loud. To be fair, I'm not a big fan of this method. It relates to classic consumer testing such as sardines to caviar.
Many test participants you get with these tools sound as if they're semi-professional examine users.
You might also test to your personal user panel. That is certainly an improvement on using the tool's testers.
Recorded mouse movements and time
inside this technique, you do not see the test participant and you don't hear them. They see the task on the monitor, perform the task and complete a questionnaire to give additional feedback after every job.
Comments