Design Process and Evaluation-Website

8/8/2019 Design Process and Evaluation-Website

1/8

Design Process and Evaluation

There are several usability-related issues,methods, and procedures that require careul consideration when

designing and developing Web sites. The most important o these

are presented in this chapter, including up-ront issues such as

setting clear and concise goals or a Web site, determining a correct

and exhaustive set o user requirements, ensuring that the Web site

meets users expectations, setting usability goals, and providing useul

content.

To ensure the best possible outcome, designers should consider a

ull range o user-interace issues, and work to create a Web site that

enables the best possible human perormance. The current research

suggests that the best way to begin the construction o a Web site is

to have many dierent people propose design solutions (i.e., parallel

design), and then to ollow up using an iterative design approach.

This requires conducting the appropriate usability tests and using the

fndings to make changes to the Web site.

1Design

Processand

Evaluation

Research-Based Web Design & Usabil i ty Guidelines


2/8

Guideline: Use all available resources to betterunderstand users requirements.

Comments: The greater the number o exchangeso inormation with potential users, the better the developers understandingo the users requirements. The more inormation that can be exchangedbetween developers and users, the higher the probability o having a successul

Web site. These could include customer support lines, customer surveys andinterviews, bulletin boards, sales people, user groups, trade show experiences,

ocus groups, etc. Successul projects require at least our (and average fve)dierent sources o inormation. Do not rely too heavily on user intermediaries.

The inormation gathered rom exchanges with users can be used to builduse cases. Use cases describe the things that users want and need the Web

site to be able to do. In one study, when compared with traditional unction-oriented analyses, use cases provided a specifcation that produced better userperormance and higher user preerences.

Sources:Adkisson, 2002; Brinck, Gergle and Wood, 2002; Buller, et al.,2001; Coble, Karat and Kahn, 1997; Keil and Carmel, 1995; Li and Henning,2003; Norman, 1993; Osborn and Elliott, 2002; Ramey, 2000; Vora, 1998;Zimmerman, et al., 2002.

1:2 Establish User Requirements

Strength of Evidence:

Relative Importance:

1:1 Provide Useful Content

Guideline: Provide content that is engaging, relevant,and appropriate to the audience.

Comments: Content is the inormation provided ona Web site. Do not waste resources providing easy access and good usability tothe wrong content. One study ound that content is the most critical elemento a Web site. Other studies have reported that content is more important thannavigation, visual design, unctionality, and interactivity.

Sources:Asher, 1980; Badre, 2002; Baldwin, Peleg-Bruckner and McClintock,1985; Celsi and Olson, 1988; Evans, 1998; Levine, 1996; Nielsen and Tahir,2002; Nielsen, 1997b; Nielsen, 2000; Rajani and Rosenberg, 1999; Sano, 1996;Sinha, et al., 2001; Spyridakis, 2000; Stevens, 1980.




Design

Processand

Evaluation

See page xxiior detailed descriptions

o the rating scales

2


3/8

Guideline: Ensure that the Web site ormat meetsuser expectations, especially related to navigation,

content, and organization.

Comments: One study ound that users defne'usability' as their perception o how consistent,efcient, productive, organized, easy to use,intuitive, and straightorward it is to accomplish tasks within a system.It is important or designers to develop an understanding o their usersexpectations through task analyses and other research. Users can haveexpectations based on their prior knowledge and past experience. Onestudy ound that users acted on their own expectations even when there

were indications on the screen to counter those expectations.

The use o amiliar ormatting and navigation schemes makes it easier orusers to learn and remember the layout o a site. Its best to assume thata certain percentage o users will not use a Web site requently enough tolearn to use it efciently. Thereore, using amiliar conventions works best.

Sources: Carroll, 1990; Detweiler and Omanson, 1996; Lynch and Horton,2002; McGee, Rich and Dumas, 2004; Spool, et al., 1997; Wilson, 2000.

Example:


Design

Processand

Evaluation

1:3 Understand and Meet Users Expectations



The Copyright Ofce Web site meets user expectationslinks to the most likely

user activities or queries (searching records, licensing and registering works, etc.)

are prominently displayed and logically ordered, and there are very few distractions

on the page.

3


4/8

Guideline: Identiy and clearly articulate the primarygoals o the Web site beore beginning the designprocess.

Comments: Beore starting design work, identiy the primary goals o the Web

site (educate, inorm, entertain, sell, etc.). Goals determine the audience,content, unction, and the sites unique look and eel. It is also a good ideato communicate the goals to, and develop consensus or the site goals rom,

management and those working on the Web site.

Sources: Badre, 2002; Coney and Steehouder, 2000; Detweiler and Omanson,1996.

1:5 Set and State Goals




D

esign

Process

and

Evaluation

Guideline: Involve users to improve the completenessand accuracy o user requirements.

Comments: One o the basic principles o user-centered design is the early and continual ocus onusers. For this reason, user involvement has becomea widely accepted principle in the development ousable systems. Involving users has the most value when trying to improve thecompleteness and accuracy o user requirements. It is also useul in helping toavoid unused or little-used system eatures. User involvement may improve thelevel o user acceptance, although the research is not yet clear that it does inall cases. There is little or no research suggesting that user involvement leads to

more eective and efcient use o the system. Finally, the research suggests thatusers are not good at helping make design decisions. To summarize, users aremost valuable in helping designers know what a system should do, but not inhelping designers determine how best to have the system do it.

Sources: Barki and Hartwick, 1991; Baroudi, Olson and Ives, 1986; Fosterand Franz, 1999; Heinbokel, et al., 1996; Ives and Olson, 1984; Kujala, 2003;McKeen and Guimaraes, 1997.



1:4 Involve Users in Establishing User Requirements4


5/8

Guideline: I user perormance is important, makedecisions about content, ormat, interaction, and

navigation beore deciding on colors and decorativegraphics.

Comments: Focus on achieving a high rate o userperormance beore dealing with aesthetics. Graphicsissues tend to have little impact, i any, on users success rates or speed o

perormance.

Sources: Baca and Cassidy, 1999; Grose, et al., 1999; Tractinsky, 1997.

1:6 Focus on Performance Before Preference



Research-Based Web Design & Usabi l i ty Guidel ines

Design

Process

and

Evaluation

Guideline: Consider as many user interace issuesas possible during the design process.

Comments: Consider numerous usability-related issuesduring the creation o a Web site. These can include: the context within whichusers will be visiting a Web site; the experience levels o the users; the typeso tasks users will perorm on the site; the types o computer and connectionspeeds used when visiting the site; evaluation o prototypes; and the results o

usability tests.

Sources: Bailey, 1996; Buller, et al., 2001; Graham, Kennedy and Benyon, 2000;Mayhew, 1992; Miller and Stimart, 1994; Zimmerman, et al., 2002.

1:7 Consider Many User Interface Issues




o the rating scales

5


6/8

6


Design

Processand

Evaluation

1:8 Be Easily Found in the Top 30

Guideline: In order to have a high probability o beingaccessed, ensure that a Web site is in the top 30

reerences presented rom a major search engine.

Comments: One study showed that users usually do not look at Web sites that arenot in the top 30. Some o the eatures required to be in the top 30 includeappropriate meta-content and page titles, the number o links to the Web site, as

well as updated registration with the major search engines.

Sources:Amento, et al., 1999; Dumais, Cutrell and Chen, 2001; Lynch and Horton,2002; Spink, Bateman and Jansen, 1999.

Example:

The below snippet of html code illustrates one important way of ensuring that a Web

site will be found by search enginesembedding keyword metatags. These keywords

are read by search engines and used to categorize Web sites; understanding typical

users will provide clues as to what keywords should be used.




7/8


8/8

Guideline: Use personas to keep the design teamocused on the same types o users.

Comments: Personas are hypothetical stand-ins oractual users that drive the decision making or interaces. They are not real people,but they represent real people. They are not made up, but are discovered as a by-product o an investigative process with rigor and precision. Interaces should beconstructed to satisy the needs and goals o personas.

Some usability specialists eel that designers will have ar more success designingan interace that meets the goals o one specifc person, instead o trying to design

or the various needs o many. The design team should develop a believable

persona so that everybody will accept the person. It is usually best to detail two orthree technical skills to give an idea o computer competency, and to include oneor two fctional details about the personas lie. Even though a ew observationalstudies have been reported, there are no research studies that clearly demonstrateimproved Web site success when personas are used.

Keep the number o personas or each Web site relatively small use three tofve. For each persona include at least a frst name, age, photo, relevant personalinormation, and work and computer profciency.

Sources: Cooper, 1999; Goodwin, 2001; Head, 2003.

8


1:11 Use Personas


o the rating scales

Design

Processand

Evaluation Strength of Evidence:


Documents

Design Process and Evaluation-Website