UX Myth Explained
Earlier this year, .Net magazine posted an article that takes a close look at several myths often associated with usability testing. The article offers insight into five commonly held misconceptions about usability testing.
As the article notes, usability testing of a product, application or website is by far the most widely used usability evaluation method.
You can see from the spirited discussion in the comments section that several readers offer a different take on the author’s conclusions.
Looking Closer
In general, we see the wisdom of the author’s conclusions he offers in response to each of the five UX myths. In fact the first myth – about the most effective sample size of test participants – will be addressed in a future blog post.
Quality Research, Reliable Results
Test findings from a usability study, and the overall value they offer to the product development team, are only as good as the methods used to collect the information and analyze the data.
While we would concur with the author that anyone can sit with a user and watch them carrying out basic tasks and learn a few things, product development decisions generally require reliable results that are generated from sound user research methodologies. Methodologies are selected based upon the application, the target audience and business goals
Said another way, the quality of usability testing findings rely on the quality of research methods used and the expertise of the researchers.
From participant recruiting to testing location, from selecting tasks to perform and phrasing the questions, usability testing is both an art and science requiring experience and know-how. As an example, effective participant recruiting is crucial to collecting reliable data during usability testing. It’s easy to skew test results with a group of participants that don’t match the test criteria.Considering the benefits of moderated and unmoderated usability testing, and in-lab or remote testing and selecting the best model can be paramount to the success of the study.
As an example, unmoderated testing is most effective when the tasks to be performed are relatively straightforward and the questions to be answered are fairly specific.
The method offers greater convenience and more natural behavior for participants, who complete their sessions from the comfort of their home or office, using their own computers, when their schedule permits. An unmoderated study often can be a prelude to a moderated study, depending on the goals of the usability testing or the design process.
Further Insight
Indeed, the myth of “do it yourself” testing is important to examine, and we’ve only covered a few of the issues here related to the UX Myths article, which is available here to read in full. The piece is a great thought-starter when it comes to a discussion of user research goals and methodologies.
For further insight, TecEd offers a library of user testing publications that address this issue of sound research methodology.
Or better yet, contact TecEd to continue the conversation!
About the Author
