User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•1,334 views
Presented to EPUG-UKI 2015 (the conference of the UK and Ireland Ex Libris users' group) at the British Library, Monday 5 October.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies
Similar to User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies (20)
More from Andrew Preater
More from Andrew Preater (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies
- 1. User experience at Imperial a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies Andrew Preater Head of Library Information Systems @preater @imperiallibrary EPUG-UKI 2015
- 4. User Experience as a strategic priority
- 5. • Two iterations of user testing • Redesign Primo UI • Re-launch • Groundwork for third iteration of testing Summary January – September 2015
- 7. Round one: usability. January 2015 • “Discount usability testing” (Nielsen, 2009) • Student Placement: Sherif Khedry of UCL Qatar Round two: user experience. April-May 2015 • Primo user experience: focused, qualitative approach • Student Placement: George Bray of UCL DIS @NexGenGB Usability and user experience testing Nielsen, J. (2009) ‘Discount usability: 20 years’. Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/discount-usability-20-years/
- 8. Usability round 1: results Library Search meets user expectations
- 9. Usability round 1: results • Library Search meets expectations • Discovery happens elsewhere
- 10. Discovery happens elsewhere • Google et al. • Library databases • Citations • Lecturers • Friends
- 11. Usability round 1: results • Library Search meets expectations • Discovery happens elsewhere • User interface issues
- 12. UI issues Where is the book?
- 13. UI issues 1. Extra click 2. No emphasis
- 14. UI issues ?!
- 15. UI issues, ‘…and more’
- 16. User Experience testing: round 2 • 14 April planning • 27 April UCL placement student • 5-8 May interviews & analysis
- 17. Research Questions: themes • Purpose, construction, and use of search and resources • Presentation of information: what matters to the user when selecting the right results?
- 18. • Grounded theory approach • Coding of qualitative audiovisual data from: 1. Interviews 2. Card sorting Grounded theory as a UX method
- 19. • Acknowledge & work with our subjectivity as researchers • Create abstract understanding from observing users • Support a critical approach to library systems praxis Constructivist grounded theory Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edn. London: Sage
- 20. [edited] [This slide originally showed a screenshot showing how we record video of the user and their screen]
- 21. Interview notes as research data
- 23. Questions for open coding “What is this data a study of? What do the data suggest? Pronounce? Leave unsaid? From whose point of view? What theoretical category does this specific [data] indicate?” Questions to inform initial / open coding quoted from Charmaz (2014) p.116. Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edn. London: Sage
- 24. “What can it look like?” authority provides filtering technique age of journal is part of authority context sensitivity of search: importance of age of material “depends on what you are doing with it” human skill in judgement: “it is about your own judgement and experience” importance of recommendations from peers and seniors accumulation of small things peers say is important library is not a starting point for general info problem with our methodology: interviewee does not seem to want use Primo for this google is a starting point guessing textbook names, there is often a textbook called the name of the discipline. use of location facet campus as a factor “I want to stay in the Central Library” use of material facet title: looks at titles first to judge skimming through titles to see what is there assessing if something is beginner-level uncertainly: knowing i am not an expert
- 25. Questions for focused coding Which work better overall as categories? Which give a better direction in developing an overall theory from the data? How might you create a theoretical framework about discovery user experience to help inform changes to the system? Which codes fit the data “snugly” & help you to do this? Focused coding approach based on chapter 6 of Charmaz (2014) pp.138-161. Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edn. London: Sage
- 26. Summary findings
- 27. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible
- 28. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible • Searching should be painless
- 29. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible • Searching should be painless • Information is prioritised in selecting results
- 30. Redesign timeline • July Complete redesign work on sandbox • 3 August acceptance testing • 6 August cut over • 6 August onward “many eyes” help us find & fix bugs and issues
- 32. Presentation on browse results
- 33. Moving and ordering facets
- 34. Tweaking language, removing jargon
- 35. Tweaking language, removing jargon • E-Shelf “Favourites” • Advanced Search “More search options” • “Expand my results” • Imperial house style changes
- 37. Cleaner, tidier login menu
- 38. Cleaner, tidier login menu
- 39. • Changes in scope and schedule Key issues after cutover
- 40. • Changes in scope and schedule • Advanced search • A-to-Z dilemma Key issues after cutover
- 41. A-to-Z dilemma
- 42. Browse e-journals by title
- 44. • Changes in scope and schedule • Advanced Search • A-to-Z dilemma • Prioritising search results • Inconsistent metadata Key issues after cutover
- 45. Lessons learned
- 46. • Involve staff early in UX Project • Staff development • Acceptance testing adds value • Going live != success • Be prepare to justify design decisions • Open communication Summary lessons
- 47. [edited] [This slide originally showed a screenshot of our Primo relaunch Trello board with current issues]
- 48. • Quantitative surveying • “IOUX” UX investigation with Bodleian Libraries. Focus on PGT medics & NHS users Round 2 ½ and Round 3 UX work
- 49. Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edn. London: Sage Connaway, L.S., White, D., Lanclos, D., and Le Cornu, A. (2013) 'Visitors and residents: what motivates engagement with the digital information environment?', Information Research, 18 (1), March. Available at: http://www.informationr.net/ir/18-1/paper556.html Glaser, B.G. & Strass, A.L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: de Gruyter Nielsen, J. (2009) ‘Discount usability: 20 years’. Available at: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/discount-usability-20-years/ Pickard, A.J. (2004) Research methods in information. 2nd edn. London: Facet Preater, A.J. (2015) ‘UX for the win! at #CityMash’, Ginformation Systems, 11 June. Available at: http://x.preater.com/uxftw Stohn, C. (2015) ‘How do users search and discover?’. Available at: http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/UserStudiesWhitePaper Select bibliography