<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quick Turnaround Usability Testing, Part II</title>
	<atom:link href="http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/</link>
	<description>Boxes and Arrows is devoted to the practice, innovation, and discussion of design; including graphic design, interaction design, information architecture and the design of business.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 13:09:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: andrewmaier</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7697</link>
		<dc:creator>andrewmaier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7697</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve never been present for an actual usability test, but I love the process. I wish that renting a usability lab wasn&#039;t so costly. Do you happen to have any usability reports lying around for an interested party to read? I&#039;d like to see how they are structured.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never been present for an actual usability test, but I love the process. I wish that renting a usability lab wasn&#8217;t so costly. Do you happen to have any usability reports lying around for an interested party to read? I&#8217;d like to see how they are structured.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: plnii</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7698</link>
		<dc:creator>plnii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7698</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Andrew. This is off topic, but usability testing does not have to be expensive. While the QTUT method shows you how to make it shorter (which can reduce cost), you can reduce cost even further by not using a lab at all. Any conference room or quiet area will do (as long as your stakeholders are willing to watch video instead of a live session). Regarding reports, we have client confidentiality agreements which prohibit us from sharing reports, but there are a lot out there on the web.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Andrew. This is off topic, but usability testing does not have to be expensive. While the QTUT method shows you how to make it shorter (which can reduce cost), you can reduce cost even further by not using a lab at all. Any conference room or quiet area will do (as long as your stakeholders are willing to watch video instead of a live session). Regarding reports, we have client confidentiality agreements which prohibit us from sharing reports, but there are a lot out there on the web.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rgbeast</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7699</link>
		<dc:creator>rgbeast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7699</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you for the interesting article. We made Russian translation: http://webew.ru/articles/2036.webew]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the interesting article. We made Russian translation: <a href="http://webew.ru/articles/2036.webew" rel="nofollow">http://webew.ru/articles/2036.webew</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dbreaker</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7700</link>
		<dc:creator>dbreaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7700</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article.   In depth usability studies like these are invaluable for making your product better, we used them extensively at previous ecommerce companies I&#039;ve been a part of.  I especially like the whiteboard approach.

I often found that the cost/effort of running usability tests like this prevented companies I&#039;ve been at from doing enough of these types of usability tests.  To that end, I created a &quot;quick and dirty&quot; way to usability test against a specific target market, that only costs $15 per tester, and gives you results in less than 24 hours.  Check it out, I&#039;d love any comments - http://EasyUsability.com.  

Doug Breaker
Founder - http://EasyUsability.com]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article.   In depth usability studies like these are invaluable for making your product better, we used them extensively at previous ecommerce companies I&#8217;ve been a part of.  I especially like the whiteboard approach.</p>
<p>I often found that the cost/effort of running usability tests like this prevented companies I&#8217;ve been at from doing enough of these types of usability tests.  To that end, I created a &#8220;quick and dirty&#8221; way to usability test against a specific target market, that only costs $15 per tester, and gives you results in less than 24 hours.  Check it out, I&#8217;d love any comments &#8211; <a href="http://EasyUsability.com" rel="nofollow">http://EasyUsability.com</a>.  </p>
<p>Doug Breaker<br />
Founder &#8211; <a href="http://EasyUsability.com" rel="nofollow">http://EasyUsability.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: andreszap</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7701</link>
		<dc:creator>andreszap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi. This is great, thanks for putting this together and for sharing. There is both quantitative and qualitative data that can be collected during a usability test. How do you reconcile quantitative metrics or scores after a question&#039;s wording has been changed and presented differently across different participants?  I understand that this method takes many research method liberties in exchange for speed - this is why I like your method... I am just currious about your experience explaining results after questions change mid-testing.  Thanks! Az]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi. This is great, thanks for putting this together and for sharing. There is both quantitative and qualitative data that can be collected during a usability test. How do you reconcile quantitative metrics or scores after a question&#8217;s wording has been changed and presented differently across different participants?  I understand that this method takes many research method liberties in exchange for speed &#8211; this is why I like your method&#8230; I am just currious about your experience explaining results after questions change mid-testing.  Thanks! Az</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: plnii</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7702</link>
		<dc:creator>plnii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7702</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good question, Andres. The answer depends on the specific question that I’m changing. If it is just a tweak to clarify the task, then I usually make the change after the first participant, so explaining the results is not a big deal. If the task changes significantly later in the study (or is replaced by another task), I treat it like a separate task for analysis. Often, though, many of the issues you find overlap, which actually strengthens your results.

The main problem with switching tasks halfway through is the low N on some issues. It requires some intuition to determine which issues are likely to project to a larger audience, which are not, and which require more evidence. My decision is usually based on the severity of the issue (persistence, impact, and frequency) and the type of participant. If it’s a minor problem, then I might mention it with other low priority issues. If it is a big problem, like a mislabeled button that prevents 25-50% of people from ever finding a webpage, then I might include it with high-priority fixes. The participant type matters if the participant is unreliable or only one type of participant find the issue. 

In quick turnaround studies, you have an additional constraint: the release timeline. If the issues can be quickly fixed then you do it. If it is going to take a long time, you delay it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good question, Andres. The answer depends on the specific question that I’m changing. If it is just a tweak to clarify the task, then I usually make the change after the first participant, so explaining the results is not a big deal. If the task changes significantly later in the study (or is replaced by another task), I treat it like a separate task for analysis. Often, though, many of the issues you find overlap, which actually strengthens your results.</p>
<p>The main problem with switching tasks halfway through is the low N on some issues. It requires some intuition to determine which issues are likely to project to a larger audience, which are not, and which require more evidence. My decision is usually based on the severity of the issue (persistence, impact, and frequency) and the type of participant. If it’s a minor problem, then I might mention it with other low priority issues. If it is a big problem, like a mislabeled button that prevents 25-50% of people from ever finding a webpage, then I might include it with high-priority fixes. The participant type matters if the participant is unreliable or only one type of participant find the issue. </p>
<p>In quick turnaround studies, you have an additional constraint: the release timeline. If the issues can be quickly fixed then you do it. If it is going to take a long time, you delay it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zaqintosh</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7703</link>
		<dc:creator>zaqintosh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7703</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article!
A lot of people out there (as Andrew Maier pointed out) think that a usability study has to take weeks, involve expensive equipment and an interrogation room. I&#039;m glad you&#039;re getting the message out :)

A few comments of my own:

Regardless of how tight your deadline, I think it is an absolute must to at least run one or two pilot tests on internal users. The panic you describe, and the likelihood of having to change tasks (which could compromise your metric data) could be greatly reduced. More importantly, you lower the risk of potentially wasting a participants time (a big nono if you are testing an executive / VP user).

I very much liked the whiteboard strategy, I&#039;ve found that when running a study of my own, stakeholders often run into the room after a session has ended and bounce a million ideas off of me... perhaps I&#039;ll try maintaining a living storyboard throughout the process.

One other thing is, if you find that this is going to be the kind of usability study where developers are likely going to make changes between days of testing, and tasks are likely going to be altered... consider doing a &lt;a href=&quot;http://echouser.com/services.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; rapid Iterative style usability test &lt;/a&gt;. In this kind of test, metrics are charted out in iterations based on changes that happen to the UI that affect specific tasks. My company found this technique to be a powerful tool which blends nicely with a team&#039;s agile development style. Our site has some PDFs on the topic.

--Etan
UX engineer
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.echouser.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;EchoUser Inc&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article!<br />
A lot of people out there (as Andrew Maier pointed out) think that a usability study has to take weeks, involve expensive equipment and an interrogation room. I&#8217;m glad you&#8217;re getting the message out <img src='http://www-boxesandarrows-com.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>A few comments of my own:</p>
<p>Regardless of how tight your deadline, I think it is an absolute must to at least run one or two pilot tests on internal users. The panic you describe, and the likelihood of having to change tasks (which could compromise your metric data) could be greatly reduced. More importantly, you lower the risk of potentially wasting a participants time (a big nono if you are testing an executive / VP user).</p>
<p>I very much liked the whiteboard strategy, I&#8217;ve found that when running a study of my own, stakeholders often run into the room after a session has ended and bounce a million ideas off of me&#8230; perhaps I&#8217;ll try maintaining a living storyboard throughout the process.</p>
<p>One other thing is, if you find that this is going to be the kind of usability study where developers are likely going to make changes between days of testing, and tasks are likely going to be altered&#8230; consider doing a <a href="http://echouser.com/services.php" rel="nofollow"> rapid Iterative style usability test </a>. In this kind of test, metrics are charted out in iterations based on changes that happen to the UI that affect specific tasks. My company found this technique to be a powerful tool which blends nicely with a team&#8217;s agile development style. Our site has some PDFs on the topic.</p>
<p>&#8211;Etan<br />
UX engineer<br />
<a href="http://www.echouser.com" rel="nofollow">EchoUser Inc</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amishrobot</title>
		<link>http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7704</link>
		<dc:creator>amishrobot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxesandarrows.com/quick-turnaround-usability-testing-part-ii/#comment-7704</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Doug,

I think you should call your service EasySurvey or something else. That isn&#039;t a usability test at all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug,</p>
<p>I think you should call your service EasySurvey or something else. That isn&#8217;t a usability test at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
