A/B testing is a form of quantitative user research, in which a control design is compared to a variety of slightly altered designs, to see which design is most effective in reaching the test goal.
Tests can be performed on most quantifiable metrics your site, including content, emails, and web forms.
A/B testing is also known as split testing, A/B/n testing, bucket testing, and split-run testing.
Read On >>A/B Testing
Tree testing is a research technique used on websites in order to understand the topic hierarchies a user perceives, and to evaluate content findability, with a goal of optimising that website’s information architecture (O’Brien D. 2009). It can be both a quantitative and qualitative method of research.
Read On >>Tree Testing
Diary Studies are a type of qualitative longitudinal user research (Lallemand, C. 2012) used to record organic behavioural insights. Participants of diary studies self-report data about their experiences and activities, over a period of time. During this period participants will log data, collected in in a natural context, using a prescribed recording method. (Palen L., Salzman M. 2001)
Diary studies are also known as experience sampling or EMA (ecological momentary assessment) methodology (Wikipedia 2017, Experience sampling method.).
Read On >>Diary Studies
This study explores a range of research methods that may be employed during a UX project. These methods may be used: at the beginning of a project to gain an understanding of the needs of the user and the tasks they need to perform; during a project to evaluate the current design iteration; and after a product has shipped to gain an understanding of how well it is performing relative to the product goals
For this report three different methods of user research are being examined.
One method has been chosen from each of the three different phases of the product development lifecycle – Strategise, Execute and Assess.
Read On >>User Research Methods
As part of a formal testing process, we undertook testing our paper prototypes, and the goals and the scenarios we had developed.
The tasks we were testing were those identified, during the research stage, as the most popular features of the product. We would test for learnability, efficiency of use, errors and user satisfaction. Read On >>6 – Paper Prototypes and Testing
In order to better identify and understand the structure, flow, and the attributes of the tasks our app must facilitate, we must establish requirements. Read On >>4 – Task Description
“Personas put a face on the user—a memorable, engaging, and actionable image that serves as a design target. They convey information about users to your product team in ways that other artifacts cannot.”
The Essential Persona Lifecycle – Your Guide to Building and Using Personas, Tamara Adlin and John Pruitt
Design research both inspires imagination and informs intuition through a variety of methods with related intents: to expose patterns underlying the rich reality of people’s behaviors and experiences, to explore reactions to probes and prototypes, and to shed light on the unknown through iterative hypothesis and experiment.
Jane Fulton Suri, creative director, IDEO – “Informing
Our Intuition: Design Research for Radical Innovation” – http://
Having chosen the audience engagement app as our project, we moved to the research stage. The purpose of this stage was to understand understand the needs of people for whom we were designing, the end users. The steps we would take were: Read On >>2 – Research
Human-Centered Design Project
Project Context, Background and Aim:
Identify a problem in an existing interface or choose an activity which has not yet been addressed by an app, website, etc. Carry out research to gain an understanding of the human and the tasks they need to perform. Based on this, design a paper prototype of an application, or part of an application, to better address the problem at hand.
This project was a full user-centered design (UCD) research project.
The project was based on the poorer user experience smartphone users have bookmarking web pages, compared to the experience of users on desktop computers.
The author had created over a thousand bookmarks on his PC and Chromebook, but created very few on his smartphone.
Prior attempts to add and retrieve bookmarks using his mobile phone proved a poor user experience.
The decision to redesign the bookmarking process was based on a number of factors, including:
- The bookmarking redesign was a better match for the scope of the project.
- The prevalence of smartphone users who use their web browsers regularly, offered a much larger pool of research participants.
- Users are experienced at the process of bookmarking on personal computers, meaning user testing would require less induction.