1 / 22

IRB Web Site Usability Test Final Report

IRB Web Site Usability Test Final Report. English 3367 Web Usability Testing Team. Prepared for: Donna Peters, Project Sponsor Human Subjects Research Coordinator Texas Tech University Institutional Review Board. Introduction. Background Purpose Project Overview. Methodology.

ryder
Download Presentation

IRB Web Site Usability Test Final Report

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. IRB Web Site Usability TestFinal Report English 3367 Web Usability Testing Team Prepared for: Donna Peters, Project Sponsor Human Subjects Research Coordinator Texas Tech University Institutional Review Board

  2. Introduction Background Purpose Project Overview

  3. Methodology Qualitative Heuristic evaluation Site map Quantitative Lab tests Post test

  4. Heuristic Evaluation • Visibility of System Status • Does the web site tell you where you are? • Match of system and the real world • Does the web site use realistic language and conventions? • User control and freedom • Does the web site allow the user to control activities? • Consistency with standards • Does the web site present information and terms consistently? • Error prevention • Does the web site make it hard or easy to make mistakes? • Recognition Rather Than Recall • Does the web site make you remember things or make things obvious? • Flexibility and Efficiency of Use • Does the web site make it easy to do things in more than one way? • Minimalist Design • Does the web site encourage interaction? • Error Recovery • Are error messages plainly stated with clear solutions? • Help and Documentation • Does the web site present help effectively?

  5. Heuristic Evaluation Results

  6. Test Objectives • Terminology. Do users understand the terminology on the IRB site? • Resource types. Do users understand the differences between resource types as described on the site and how that affects the availability of items? • Organization. Is the site organization effective and usable for students trying to locate institutional review process information? Are users able to identify parts of the site relating to IRB and differentiate it from other parts of the site (ORS)? • Navigation. Is the navigation of the site efficient for an IRB approval task? Are users aware of their current location in the site and how to return to a prior point in the process? Can site be accessed from different locations by different users? • Page layout. Are the page layouts confusing or distracting? Are they too similar or too different—too dense, or too sparse? • Form usage. Are the users made aware of the function of the various forms they need to fill out?  Can users understand and be able to properly complete the checklist? • User control. Do users feel engaged and “in control” when using the web site? • Quality of writing. Is the site well-written overall and clear enough for users to understand the information they see? • Links and controls. Are hyperlinks and controls always spotted and recognized as such on each page?

  7. User Personas

  8. Tasks Task 1: Find the “Getting Started page” Link Task 2: (F) Using the “Exemptions” page for IRB approval Task 2: (G) “What are some requirements for Principle Investigators?” Task 3: “Is TTU approval needed if TTU is not funding your research?” Task 4: What are the elements of a consent form? Task 5: Who would you contact to get additional information and how

  9. Tasks Linked to Test Objectives Graduate Scenario/Task List: Scenario 1: Allocated time, 10 minutes You are thinking about doing research involving human subjects and are required to obtain IRB permission before proceeding. Locate the “How to Get Started” link on the site. http://www.ors.ttu.edu/Newors/newhome/home/trymain.html Relevant test objectives

  10. User Test Results Task 1: Find the “Getting Started page” Link 4 out of 5 were unable to find the “Getting Started” page Task 2: (F) Using the “Exemptions” page for IRB approval 2 out of 3 had difficulty finding and using the form Task 2: (G) “What are some requirements for Principle Investigators?” 2 out of 2 had difficulty answering the question Task 3: “Is TTU approval needed if TTU is not funding your research?” 4 out of 5 answered the question incorrectly Task 4: What are the elements of a consent form? Link 3 out of 5 were not able to answer correctly Task 5: Who would you contact to get additional information and how 5 out of 5 were able to answer correctly

  11. Post Test Results

  12. Key Findings Language unclear in pages and in forms Navigation of site difficult and navigation bar confusing Introductions to forms unclear and skimpy Users did not know where to start Overall site poorly organized

  13. Language Not Clear http://media.english.ttu.edu/faculty/barker/3367irb/language.wmv

  14. Introduction Not Useful Introduction to forms need more information http://media.english.ttu.edu/faculty/barker/3367irb/introduction.wmv

  15. Navigation Unclear Improve navigation by reducing redundant links. http://media.english.ttu.edu/faculty/barker/3367irb/navigation.wmv

  16. “How To Get Started” Not Useful Make “How to Get Started” a series of steps with links. http://media.english.ttu.edu/faculty/barker/3367irb/howto.wmv

  17. Site Map Evaluation “The site is mostly a collection of documents…” Organize the site around recognized user persons

  18. Site Poorly Organized • Organize the site around recognized users • Tester -using the site to find information on testing procedures and policies • Testee -interested in participating in the testing process • Eraider member (password needed)-links that can only be used by those with an eraider account • Administrator (password possibility) staff who will be conducting or overseeing testing and research, and may need administrative access to use the link • External link -leads to links that are not directly controlled by texas tech (or ORS & IRBwebsite)

  19. Recommendations Clarify definitions of terms Link Make “How to Get Started” useful Improve navigation by reducing redundant links Create informative overviews for forms Reorganize the pages according to user types

  20. Conclusion • Project Mission: make educated recommendations concerning the effectiveness of the ORS Human Subjects website • Project Methods: heuristic evaluation, qualitative and quantitative measurements, usability testing • Subjects Studied: terminology, resource types, organization, navigation page, layout, form usage, user control, quality of writing, links and controls • Recommendations: • Clarify definitions of terms • Make “Getting Started” useful • Improve navigation by reducing redundant links • Create informative overviews for forms • Organize the site around user needs

  21. Final Report • Please view our entire report at: • http://irbusability.pbwiki.com/

  22. Questions? Thank you!

More Related