One of the biggestcauses of user failure is when users simply can’t locate网站上的东西。第一法则e-commerce design状态,“如果用户不能find该产品,用户不能buy产品。“因此,这些设计缺陷不仅仅是可用性问题,他们通常也是一个网站的最大盈利能力问题。

Findability and Discoverability Issues

当网站访问者定期进行搜索时,应通过浏览容易地或者在网站内流量不足以使关键任务页面不足,该站点可能遭受低的可求解性和可发现性。

Findability:用户可以轻松查找他们假设的内容或功能存在于网站中。

Discoverability:用户遇到了他们之前不了解的新内容或功能。

High findability and discoverability are the results of awell-defined information architecture and well-designed navigation system。The challenge with findability and discoverability issues is determining the root cause: is it the information architecture or is it the navigation design? Here are 2 examples to illustrate the difference between IA and Navigation/UI issues:

问题示例1:网站访问者未访问本网站的两个重要部分。

可能导致问题的潜在问题:

IA-issue:用户不理解或不被视为部分的名称。

UI问题:用户不会注意到这些部分的链接。

问题示例2:Site visitors never use a相关链接内容页面上的导航组件。

可能导致问题的潜在问题:

IA-issue:包含的内容链接相关链接与用户需要的(分类问题)无关。

UI问题:Users do not notice the相关链接导航组件(因为也许它太低了页面或者被误认为广告)。

The cost ofguessing the cause问题可能非常高。花钱将重新设计整个用户界面是一个耻辱,只是发现底层IA是问题或反之亦然。资源和时间有限,知道根本原因是无价之宝。我们建议的所有方法都可以快速,远程执行没有审核(unless desired). There are no excuses for not testing.

Employing Multiple Methods to Determine Cause

The key to identifying the true cause of a problem is to combine multiple testing methods. By running separate studies to measure (a) the information architecture (IA) and (b) the user interface (UI), we increase the likelihood of correctly identifying the cause of website failures.

下面描述的4种方法回答了不同的问题(焦点或UI聚焦),并提供了定性或定量(或两者)的结果。

(*)可用性测试通常是定性的,但可以定量with some extra effort or by using online tools for未经发出的定量测试

1. Tree Testing

树测试是一个以IA为中心的技术,以确定是否可以在网站的IA中找到任务关键信息。它不显示测试参与者的用户界面;它们仅使用链接名导航。

问题是答案:

  • Are the names of categories understandable?
  • Do the category names accurately convey content?
  • Is content categorized in a user-centered manner?
  • Are content titles distinguishable from one another?
  • Is information difficult to find because the structure is too broad or too deep?

设置和测试:

To set up a tree test, you create an information-architecture “tree” which delineates the groupings and hierarchy of pages (you can create this in a spreadsheet and paste it into the system that you use for testing). You then create specific tasks that involve finding specific destinations (called “end nodes”) of the information architecture (e.g., “Find a health insurance plan that covers a family of four and costs less than $500 per month”). Study participants conduct the tasks using the tree.

Results:

结果是定量的,包括但不限于:

Direct success rate:How many participants found the right answer without having to go back up and down the tree?

间接成功率:How many participants got the right answer, but had to navigate back up and down the tree to find it?

首先单击数据:Which tier-1 categories did users click first? First clicks are a good indicator of the strength of category names.

Tool:treeUserzoom树测试Userlytics Tree Testing

参与者的TreeJack树测试界面:任务总结在屏幕顶部,参与者必须导航树中所示的标签名称以查找所需信息。

treetree-test summary results for one task indicate direct success, indirect success, and time taken.

2. Closed Card Sorting

封闭的卡片排序是一种以IA为中心的方法,以评估类别名称的强度。

问题是答案:

  • Are the names of categories understandable?
  • Do the category names accurately convey content?
  • Is content categorized in a user-centered manner?
  • Are content titles distinguishable from one another?

设置和测试:

To conduct this type of test, you provide participants with “cards” including names or descriptions of content/functionality. Then they must assign these cards to your categories. (Such关闭卡片排序与传统相反打开card sortingwhere users get the same stack of cards but have to create the categories themselves.)

Results:

The results are both quantitative and qualitative, and include:

相似:将相同内容分组的次数

标准化网格:卡片分类为您的预期类别的次数

Logic of assignment:With card sorting, it’s recommended to moderate a portion of your tests in-person or remotely via teleconference. This allows you to interview users to understand why they grouped certain content together, why they assigned items to particular categories, and how they interpret the category names.

工具:OptimalSortUsabilitest Card SortingUserZoom Card SortingUserlytics

OptimalSort的封闭式封面排序:“卡”在左侧,类别位于页面的正文中。参与者将卡拖到类别中进行排序。

OptimalSort:标准化网格对于封闭卡,分类说明了将卡片分配给每个类别的用户。如果大多数用户挑选不同的类别,而不是您对特定卡的目的,那么是时候重新考虑了IA结构了。

3.单击“测试”

点击测试是关注的;他们被进行以确定用户点击接口以查找特定信息或功能的位置。单击测试的一个缺点是它们不是交互式:参与者显示了一个站点的静态图像,必须显示他们单击以便执行任务的位置。但是,一旦他们点击,就会被认为完成任务,并且可以移动到下一个任务。要测试交互式元素,应进行可用性测试。

问题是答案:

  • Which navigation components are utilized?
  • Which navigation components go unnoticed?
  • Which navigation components are avoided?

设置和测试:

To conduct this type of test, you upload a screenshot, wireframe, or sketch of a page into a click-testing tool. You then create tasks. Participants must click on the image to indicate where they would go to conduct the task.

Results:

结果是一个热图说明,用户clicked. The heatmap helps you determine if the navigation design is noticeable or if elements are conflicting and create too much noise.

工具:USABILLA首先单击测试ChalkmarkUserzoom屏幕截图单击测试

Chalkmark的Collic-Test接口用于参与者:任务总结在屏幕顶部,参与者必须点击图像,以指示他们将要进行任务的位置。

A click-text heatmap shows where users clicked
Chalkmark’s click-test heatmap illustrates where users click to conduct each task in the study.

4.可用性测试

Usability testing is conducted to determine how and why users navigate a website (or a website prototype) to conduct tasks.

问题是答案:

  • How do users find information?
  • Which navigation components are utilized?
  • Which navigation components go unnoticed?
  • Which navigation components are avoided?

设置和测试:

要进行此类测试,您可以使用原型(纸张或互动)或实时站点。然后,您创建任务并询问参与者执行任务。您遵守进行任务的用户,并在与导航组件与导航组件交互时,它们如何交互,以及避免或忽略导航。您可以对人或远程进行可用性测试。远程可用性测试can be moderated live (via teleconference) or unmoderated using a variety of online services. (Many options, from established services likeUserZoomWhatUsersDo初创起来YouEye。)

Standard user testing requires no further equipment than a live user and a computer. (Or a piece of paper in the case of纸质原型设计。)但是,如果预算允许,您可以用眼镜运行研究which may help if you’re particularly concerned about whether users ever even see the desired navigation components.

Results:

The results include task success rate and difficulty ratings, identification of interface elements that cause friction, and better understanding of the users’ mental models of the site.

工具:人员测试,远程审核测试,如goto会议或webex等服务,remote unmoderated testing tools

Identifying the Cause Is Key to Successful Remediation

当你运行多个类型的研究可能鳍d positive results from one test and negative results from another. Inconsistent results from different types of studies precisely illustrate the value of running multiple tests to focus on both IA and UI. For example, you may run a closed card sort and find that users have no issues assigning subcategory content into your global categories. However, a click test (of the same environment) may result in painfully low success rates, with users clicking in all the wrong places when asked where they would go to conduct mission-critical tasks. Thus, put together, the 2 tests indicate that your category names are fine, but your layout is problematic and that your best investment is in designing new layout configurations.

Low findability and discoverability is a panic-inducing problem which can lead to knee-jerk uninformed and unsuccessful fixes. It’s not uncommon for teams to have limited time to conduct studies, which is why these four methods are so useful: they can be set upquickly那run同时,并进行remotely—without any moderation if so desired. Therefore,结合两个或更多这些测试is a reasonable monetary and time investment, as it can help you hone in on the cause of your problems and will mitigate the risk of investing in an expensive nonsolution.

请注意:

我们列出了本文讨论的研究方法的各种工具。我们推荐的methods那we don’t specifically recommend any individualtools。As a vendor-neutral organization, Nielsen Norman Group doesn’t endorse such products, and the one to use on any given project would depend on your specific needs and budget. We are happy to provide consulting on such questions, but the answer would be different in each case.