1 / 39

Improving the User Experience Resource Access for the 21th Century a NISO-STM Initiative

Improving the User Experience Resource Access for the 21th Century a NISO-STM Initiative. 27 April 2018. Serena Rosenhan VP, User Experience Design at ProQuest RA21 Steering Committee Member. Session Outline. Problem: What and Why? Solution: How? User Experience Prototype Demo

parchibald
Download Presentation

Improving the User Experience Resource Access for the 21th Century a NISO-STM Initiative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving the User ExperienceResource Access for the 21th Centurya NISO-STM Initiative 27 April 2018 Serena Rosenhan VP, User Experience Design at ProQuest RA21 Steering Committee Member

  2. Session Outline • Problem: What and Why? • Solution: How? • User Experience • Prototype Demo • Feedback and Testing • Next steps

  3. Problem: What and Why? RA 21 Scope

  4. RA21 Problems IP-based access management increasingly problematic No seamless access from any device, location, or search engine Inconsistent and confusing patchwork of access solutions while off of the corporate/campus network (e.g. VPN servers, Proxy servers, Shibboleth) Increasing volume of illegal downloads and piracy Lack of user data to develop user-focused, personalized services

  5. Researcher Workflow • Accessing content across multiple publishers while on the campus or corporate network is seamless. Typical Research Discovery Workflow On Network

  6. Researcher Workflow • But accessing content while off the campus or corporate network is troublesome. Typical Research Discovery Workflow Off Network

  7. User experience off corporate/campus network 1

  8. User experience off corporate/campus network 2

  9. User experience off corporate/campus network 3

  10. User experience off corporate/campus network 4

  11. User experience off corporate/campus network 5

  12. User experience off corporate/campus network 6

  13. User experience off corporate/campus network  6

  14. Researcher Workflow • RA21 seeks to implement a consistent user experience regardless of location or device used. Typical Research Discovery Workflow Any Network

  15. Solution: How? Approach and Assumptions

  16. RA21 Approach • Recommend access strategies beyond IP recognition • Embrace SAML-based federated authentication as an alternative • privacy-preserving security protocol • already widely deployed throughout corporate and academic sites • BUT – re-think the user experience • Fix the “Where Are You From” (WAYF) problem • Nothing will be as seamless as IP address recognition, but it needs to be as seamless as possible • Test and improve solutions by organizing pilots in a variety of environments (Corporate, Academic) • Create best practice recommendations

  17. RA 21 UX Track Working Assumptions • One common best practice experience for all users (corporate, academic, ngo, public) • Define the user experience  determine technical approach • Informed - but not constrained - by current recommendations (e.g. NISO Espresso)

  18. User Experience Process and Recommendations

  19. RA21 UX Track Process

  20. UX Recommendation Building Blocks • Consistent visual cue • A consistent, recognizable call to action appears on all service provider pages • Text sets expectations for steps to access

  21. UX Recommendation Building Blocks • Find Identity Provider by Institution Search • Search by institution name, abbreviation, or email • university of Minnesota • umn • myname@umn.edu

  22. UX Recommendation Building Blocks • Help identifying Typeahead search and URL cue • Matching institutions appear as a user types • Seeing destination url provides users with a clue that they are on the right path.

  23. UX Recommendation Building Blocks • Remembered institutions • Previously selected institution(s) are remembered across providers. • E.g. If user accessed ACS article through University of Minnesota, the same school will be displayed for ProQuest article

  24. Prototype Demo Basic Implementation +

  25. POC Demo • https://ra21.mnt.se/google_scholar.html

  26. RA21 UX Development • Level 1: Least technically complex implementation (today’s prototype) All subsequent visits to a publisher site provide seamless access to content for some period of time (e.g. hours, days, weeks, or months, depending on publisher policy).

  27. RA21 UX Development • Level 2: Requires API development on publisher site (coming soon) All subsequent visits to a publisher site provide seamless access to content for some period of time (e.g. hours, days, weeks, or months, depending on publisher policy).

  28. Level 2 Once known, institution name is included in the call to action to shorten user’s path to the full access

  29. Level 2 Alternative design option

  30. Feedback and Testing In Progress . . .

  31. Usability Testing • Visual cue study – complete • Initial prototype study – in progress • Academic users • Corporate users • Research groups

  32. User Study: Cue

  33. Findings Highlights “Access Through Institution” works People recognize the cue/pattern PDF/Full text are the first options people try Placement of the cue and other options on the page matter Too many options without proper hierarchy on the page make it harder for people to differentiate between options and find call to action

  34. Early Recommendations • Present article access option in hierarchical orderPresent option which is mostly likely to get the user access with more prominence. present institutional access as the primary call to action. Place other options nearby. Present article access options togetherIf the document preview page contains several options to access articles, present them together so that the user can quickly see all of the available options without scanning/scrolling 45

  35. User Study – Live PrototypeIn Progress

  36. Preliminary Findings Highlights – In Progress Placement of Access Through Institution makes a big difference in outcomes, some people don’t scroll, other options on the page distract People pay attention to PDF, Download options first People search by institution name not email People start recognizing the pattern across providers People find remembering institution beneficial People don’t seem to notice the footer with steps 1,2,3,4

  37. Next Steps Prototypes, Features and Recommendations

  38. Next Steps • Finish Level 1 • More user testing of initial prototype • Prototype updates based on what we learn • Make prototype production ready: design refinement, responsive, accessible, compatible with major browsers • Add features • Suggested institutions based on previously used • Remember options • Handling local ID and institution accounts • Level 2 prototype definition

  39. Learn more about RA21 Visit:https://www.RA21.org Contact: Julia Wallace Julia@RA21.org Heather Flanagan Heather@RA21.org

More Related