In this project we:
-
Evaluate the usability, usefulness, and acceptability of GLANSIS.
-
Choose appropriate evaluation techniques based on the goals and nature of the system.
-
Write reports and give presentations that that clearly convey the findings of evaluations and argue for the validity and relevance of methods chosen.
-
Team Size: Four Members
-
Duration: Jan '22 to April '22
-
My Role: UX Researcher
Lessons Learned
0
01.
First Timer
As a first time running a usability study, and conducting a range of techniques on a single platform, I learnt how to applying and utilize these techniques to reveal which method yields the best solutions for your conflict. I learnt to write reports that communicates to the client not only the process but also the findings.
02.
Project on a budget
Through our project, it was important to keep in mind all the constraints that come limited budgets and resources. We were cognizant of how these constraints may restrict the scope of work that we are able to undertake. Especially when it came to the surveys, we were unable to recruit more people to produce accurate and reliable results. We strived to combat this issue by clearly defining our research goals and objectives in the beginning of the study. This led us to focus our questions and create a more targeted survey. We pilot test our survey before sending it out.
03.
My love for User Research
This class is considered one of the most challenging in our courses since it is a great amount of research squeezed into a span of a semester. For me personally, this strengthened my desire to be User Experience Researcher. This iterative process helped us identify user problems and pain points, which is very satisfying to solve. It was rewarding to see that our research would potentially have a positive impact.
Comparative Evaluation
2
Five comparative products were chosen for comparison with GLANSIS . Those comparators were sorted into Tier 1, Tier 2, and Niche competitors based on Goodman’s Taxonomy. We analyzed each comparator based on our key criteria. The research questions that guided our study were:
1. What are the most used features of the comparators?
2. How do other competitors allow users to search information?
3. How do these competitors present their information?
Surveys
3
Next we conducted surveys. The main aim of the survey was to gain more insights into trends of a focused user base of GLANSIS. We focused on educators as our targeted user base and in particular educators in the biology field and mainly college level biology instructors. We drafted a survey based on three core questions and piloted it first to a small pool. The survey was made through Qualtrics XM and was available online for around two weeks by the end of which we had obtained 35 responses. The data was then analyzed and visualized through Qualtrics and Excel.
01
Academic journals can be the strongest competitors to GLANSIS.
02
The majority of educators prefer using a source because of convenience in the searching process.
03
Educators are more comfortable using the internet than using physical resources.
04
Educators find the species profile as the most important information when researching invasive species, followed by a brief invasion history and management.
Heuristic Evaluation
4
The team at GLANSIS plans to move beyond the higher level analysis and focus on targeted users and particular features. In this report, our focus is on the usability features of the website. We therefore conducted a heuristic evaluation to analyze the features of this website with a metric and to then identify issues that users might be facing.
Throughout the heuristic evaluation, we focused on these criteria:
-
How the users reach their desired information in the database and what aspects of the web work well
-
What features of the web might not be working efficiently and hence would need further work or research on
The main purpose of the study is to get a better understanding of one set of user bases as well as the main features of the database. By focusing on these aspects in our evaluation we would uncover the best possible user flows to get to the intended information while also focusing on the functionality and aesthetic of the features.
User Interviews
1
We started our study by conducting user interviews. This was to develop a detailed understanding of our target population. Five participants were interviewed, one of which was the primary stakeholder and others were user interviews. To recruit the participants, we contacted educators who might be potential users of the database. We analyzed the interview result by creating an affinity wall. Data from interviewees were categorized so we can have a better understanding of the overall opinions about GLANSIS in different ways. Here's what we found:
02
The risk assessment feature gives ample information on a species.
03
The interactive and dynamic maps are one of the most helpful features.
01
The advanced search feature is comprehensive and useful especially to those experienced users.
04
There are many opportunities for building an educational hub in GLANSIS.
Usability Tests
5
Our team conducted usability tests on five total participants through a Zoom virtual environment. Our team asked pre-test and post-test questions to gauge the participant’s preliminary knowledge and additional information they want to share after completing tasks. The five tasks focused on three main features: the advanced species search, the species profile page, and the map explorer.
Our team recorded the testing data on an Excel spreadsheet and synthesized the results. From these results, our team gathered the following findings:
-
The home page can be confusing to find information.
-
The advanced species search results page does not seem clickable.
-
The Species Profile page is text-heavy and has low readability.
-
The Map Explorer feature is not intuitive.
-
The Map Explorer feature’s feedback is not noticeable.
These are our team’s recommendations, respectively:
-
The three main features of the database can be located at the center of the home page, while the FAQ and Additional Resources buttons can be positioned in the footer.
-
In the advanced species search results table, the species picture, scientific name, and common name should be prioritized and clickable.
-
To increase readability, information on the Species profile page can be categorized by hierarchy of information and blocked in a pattern that can be followed by users.
-
The map explorer page can utilize the principles of hierarchy grids to prioritize user interface elements connected to a particular function.
-
The map explorer feature’s feedback can be more apparent, and the map itself can indicate loading through the use of blur.