People notice your mistakes!
This is Part 2 of my usability test report.
Previously, I talked about how I observed that people have their own understanding of how to navigate websites.
During my test, I also found that people were quick to point out what they considered to be mistakes.
2 out of 5 participants commented on content that they thought was incorrectly labeled in the navigation.
One participant, who rated his level of experience as ‘Somewhat Experienced’ noticed that a section on a particular product’s nutritional values was placed in the restaurant menu section; he asked “How come the nutritional column is mixed with the food column? I’m looking for ‘nutritional values’ instead of menu”.
It seems that he expected nutritional information to be on a separate page. When I asked why, he said that there was already too much information on products and he wouldn’t want to view nutritional information unless he was specifically looking for it.
Sounds like common sense, huh?
Interestingly, 3 participants did not view the product TVC because they didn’t consider it important to their experience!
When probed further, they said that they could watch it on Youtube where they could read other people’s comments and look at links to other videos.
While it’s obviously not wrong to put your product TVCs on your website, I think that it’s debatable when doing so becomes irrelevant in the context of usefulness; why put a video on a site when people can’t comment about it, share it or do anything with it other than watch it once?
It was really cool that each person had their own definition of design errors.
While none of the participants complained about the tone of the copy or took issue with white space and colors, most participants expected information to be found at certain locations, only to discover that the information they were looking for was either unavailable or non-existent.
The problem, of course, isn’t bad design; it’s bad information architecture and the only solution is to organize content into relevant and consistent hierarchies.
Next Post: Part 3 – Accessibility = Stickiness