Tesco recently released details of a new feature to their online offering. This feature allows users to view a product in 3D, using augmented reality, as if they are holding it in their hands. Sounds great huh?

The objective here is to help online shoppers make a buying decision. The example Tesco gives is of a busy mum who is looking to buy a new TV, and needs to ensure it will fit well in the living room, and will have enough ports for her kids’ gaming machines.

However, there are a number of flaws with the process that result in a poor user experience:

• Firstly, there is a process:
• Accept Active X
• Download and install a plug-in
• Accept the licence
• Have a ‘marker’ to hand – or print one out
• Ensure I have a webcam, and it is on
• Hold up the marker to the webcam
• Finally, I can look at something. However, the 3d image is poor quality
• Holding it in the palm of your hand does not really allow you to envisage how it will look in your living room

So let’s look at some of these:

You have to download a plug in to your machine

Users are now familiar with shopping online, using websites without the need to download external software to run. By including a requirement to download something Tesco has added a step in the process that users are not expecting, and many are likely to be uncomfortable with.

You need to have a specific physical item in your hand

Now the user has downloaded the plug-in they now have to have a physical item in their hand. This can be something you already own, but if not you can print this out. This is another stage in the process that users are unfamiliar with. The perceived hassle for an unknown gain plays a big part in usability. Forms are normally the biggest culprit, but we imagine that this step will prove too much for most users.

The 3d image is poor quality

So now the user has gotten through the process they are now ready to view the product in the palm of their hand. Disappointingly, the quality of the product graphics is poor and doesn’t really do the product justice. The user can’t really imagine a TV sitting in the corner of the living room when it is sat in the palm of their hand. Ok, the user can look at the ports on the back of the TV, but they may be left wanting a quality image of the TV to validate the pixelated version they’re looking at.

So, what do users need?

When we’ve tested retail websites the product information pages are often key to the user making a buying decision. Imagery is often poor, leaving users guessing or unsure. At this point many users will leave the site and try elsewhere until they are satisfied enough to buy it (from a different website).

This new augmented reality feature from Tesco is clearly looking to solve this problem. But the user research we’ve done has shown that by simply providing images of the product from different angles, with an option to enlarge the image, works perfectly for users. 3D images with rotations and video are sometimes available too and with better image quality than the augmented reality solution.

I’m very interested to see how successful this is, but it looks to me that gimmick and technology has been prioritised ahead of usability and the user experience.  Is this trying to solve a problem that already has a perfectly acceptable solution?

About Ali Carmichael

Ali (or Alasdair) is an experienced project manager who loves his Gantt charts and milestones! He has over 12 years' experience managing successful online experiences for world class brands. Ali is responsible for ensuring our clients love what we do for them. Follow Ali on twitter @AliJCarmichael

Twitter desktop applications – they can be such handy little things. And up until last week everyone at Experience Solutions was quite happily using TweetDeck. However, the little frustrations that we had with the app became magnified due to some unrelated technical issues we were having with our internet. So the hunt for a new Twitter app began.

We chose to use TweetDeck because of some very useful features; multiple account feeds, searches, lists, and the ability to schedule updates. Personally, being able to schedule tweets in advance means that I can get on with my work safe in the knowledge that a part of our web presence is being taken care of.

After searching for other highly rated apps with similar capabilities and a perceived good UI we chose to use Seesmic desktop. But on the first day I encountered the same frustrations I had with TweetDeck.

The Problem

When using a twitter app that allows for multiple accounts there will be an option, typically a button (picture/icon/name) representing each account, to toggle between the user’s Twitter accounts. Thus, allowing the user to Tweet from one account or another.
 

TweetDeck uses small icons to represent each linked account

 
It took me a while to get used to using TweetDeck and I had to be careful to make sure I was not tweeting from the wrong account. However, I found that occasionally I did Tweet from the wrong account. This normally occurred when I wanted to send a Tweet from an account that wasn’t my default, and then forgot to select the correct account before hitting the ‘Send’ button.

Having chosen to switch Twitter applications, on the first day I used Seesmic I accidentally replied to a tweet from the wrong account, repeating the mistake Damian had made earlier in the week.

Which brings me to my point; do you notice which icon is highlighted every time you send a tweet?
 

Seesmic has the account names underneath the update field

The Solution

After sharing our frustrations, like true UX pros we started to look at how the design can change to reduce the chances of human error. We agreed that the Twitter app needs to reaffirm to the user that they are tweeting from a specific account.

Perhaps a message of some sort that questions the user just before they send it (we noticed that Seesmic have introduced this for retweeting)? But no, that could easily become very annoying. We still want it to be simple after all.
 

Seesmic has introduced an extra step in the process

 
A very close solution is CoTweet’s solution of having an overlay appear when you want to write an update that makes you choose which account you want to send it from (including multiple accounts). But this is also an extra when all I want to do is quickly write my Tweet and get on with my day.
 

CoTweet asks the user to choose an account

 
The simplest solution that we could come up with was for the send button to be different. We all have to click ‘Send’ for our 140 characters to reach the digital abyss, meaning that we engage with the send button when we click it. So what if the choice of which account to send it from was also the send button?

Here’s an example of something that I think would certainly help us at Experience Solutions when dealing with our tweets.
 

Wireframed version shows where the buttons could go

 
Each button represents a twitter account that has been added to the app. Once you have written your tweet you press the account button of choice to send it. When the tweet is sent from the first account the tweet will remain for a short period of time allowing the user to select other accounts or delete it and tweet something else.

So, now you have ‘heard’ our idea, if you have encountered this problem and have some ideas yourself, or know of an app you think comes close to solving our problem, let us know!

About Samantha Harvey

Sam recently graduated from Visual Communication. She joined our team in April 2011 and has been conducting user research and has been making sure our user interfaces follow good design principles. She's keen to point out our poor selection of fonts... er I mean typography (sorry Sam). Follow Samantha on twitter @samharvey_ux

A few years ago I was walking through Bournemouth town centre when I was stopped by a young lady, clip board at the ready, she asked, “Can I ask you a quick question?”

Me: “Yes, of course.”

Lady: “What is your favourite chocolate bar?”

Me: “Umm…A Mars bar”

Lady: “Thank you” whilst placing a big tick next to Mars on her list

A few minutes later, reflecting on my answer I realised I hadn’t eaten a Mars bar for ages. In fact, I couldn’t remember when I last bought a Mars bar. So how can it be my favourite chocolate bar? Had I lied?

This may have been a very clever question to establish what the strongest brand was in the chocolate bar market, in which case she may have got the question right. But if this was a study to find out the publics’ favourite chocolate bar the young lady who stopped me had at least one false response, and I expect many others.

Now, had this researcher observed me in a confectioners/garage/corner shop as I approached the chocolate bar stand, watched on as I pondered, then reached for a Crunchie only to change my mind and pick up a Yorkie bar, then have another scan of chocolate bars to confirm I’ve made the right decision, and then asked me what is my favourite chocolate bar, the response will be real (I don’t really have a favourite but I probably buy a Crunchie bar more than any other).

Not only is my response more accurate, if the research was not restricted to tick boxes, the conversation can continue to establish why I normally go for a Crunchie, and what made me buy a Yorkie this time.
The critical aspect of this research method is observing users in context while they are engaged in the experience rather than asking them to reflect on it at some point in the future.  This highlights one of the problems with choosing traditional market research techniques over usability testing when you’re looking to understand why users make the choices they do.

We often see this in action when asking users at the end of a usability test to describe the experience they have just had with the website. They often say it was ‘really easy to use’, but what we observed was them getting very frustrated with the site and failing to complete the tasks we gave them.

What examples can you give of asking the right question at the right time? Oh, and what’s your favourite chocolate bar ;o)

About Ali Carmichael

Ali (or Alasdair) is an experienced project manager who loves his Gantt charts and milestones! He has over 12 years' experience managing successful online experiences for world class brands. Ali is responsible for ensuring our clients love what we do for them. Follow Ali on twitter @AliJCarmichael

Having participated in several usability tests – as an observer only – you would think I’d be more prepared for when the guys turned around and told me what my next challenge would be; to carry out a usability test by myself. You would be wrong!

At this point I had only observed three sets of usability testing, from the planning stage through to producing reports. I had not been to any client feedback sessions yet, but overall I would say I had seen the majority of preparation that is required for a usability test. Upon hearing that it was to be my first time in the driving seat I was nervous, even though it was not a paid project.

I made a fair few mistakes, things that I could have done better, things I forgot entirely, and in some cases, things I just didn’t think about at all.

Here’s a breakdown of my top learning experiences from carrying out my first Usability Tests;

1. Don’t help the user

One of the main tasks I underestimated was how hard it would be to NOT help the individual.

Obviously as a researcher I am not meant to help a participant in their tasks, or lead them in any way. I am purely meant to relay tasks and then observe as the users’ lead me through what they are doing. However, this isn’t as easy as it sounds. I was conscious that whenever I was asked a question I faltered on what to reply. I remember reading a handy list of examples of what to say should such an occasion arise, but it’s hard to include every example for what could happen.

So my tip is:

• Keep it friendly and chatty, but once the test commences, don’t say more than you have to.
• When asked a question try and answer it with a question, turning it back to the participant.

2. Always have back-up tasks in the test script

No matter how many tasks I thought I had, users took me by surprise by going through them differently and inadvertently performing the next task whilst completing another. You can’t control what someone will do, and I was not experienced enough to take total control over every situation that arose. However, with careful planning and preparation you can undoubtedly help prevent most of the things that I struggled with through that first test.

Tip:

• Don’t be too rigid with your test script, no user will do exactly the same thing so be prepared

for them to go ‘off piste’, and let them move onto other tasks if it is part of their natural journey.

• Always have back up tasks for those participants who fly through the test.

3. Have the confidence to stop a user and refocus them on the task

A couple of times through the user tests I became aware that the participant was offering up more opinion than actually interacting with the website. One particular user was comparing different websites’ colour schemes and not really focusing on the task at hand. I found it hard to interrupt what he was saying as obviously I was aware of spoiling the relaxed atmosphere. Although, at the same time I needed him to focus on the task to understand what people would do when I’m not sat next to them. When a user has become too unfocused and it is not relevant to the usability test, it is necessary for the researcher to intervene.

Tip:

• Help the user to keep focused on the tasks at hand, by politely repeating the task, and try to

filter the participant’s opinions.

More tips will follow as I become familiar with running usability tests. For now, the guys have left me to learn by trial and error (on internal projects) and it’s been a really interesting experience. I’m not sure I would have learned as much if they had just told me what to do.

Are you learning about usability testing? If you’ve got any tips you want to share then it would be great to hear from you!

About Samantha Harvey

Sam recently graduated from Visual Communication. She joined our team in April 2011 and has been conducting user research and has been making sure our user interfaces follow good design principles. She's keen to point out our poor selection of fonts... er I mean typography (sorry Sam). Follow Samantha on twitter @samharvey_ux

What do you mean we only need to test with five users? Are you mad? We’re used to doing research with hundreds and thousands of users, how can you possibly suggest that five users are enough?

Ok, so I may have dramatised this a little, but we’ve had many similar conversations over the years we’ve been doing usability. It crops up on a regular basis, so we thought it was about time we anticipated the question and dealt with it here on our blog.

Usability research is not like other types of market research

It’s easy to see how clients can feel that five users are only a drop in the ocean when they are used to dealing with higher numbers of respondents. But this is the point. Usability research is very different to other forms of market research. Most forms of market research deal with opinion gathering. What do customers think and feel about this brand?, How do they feel about the service we are offering?, and What do they perceive our brand to offer over competitors… When dealing with opinions, clearly five people isn’t going to cut it, you need hundreds to get a meaningful measure.

Most of the usability research we conduct is designed to identify problems with a website. We’re asked ‘Why is my service not converting as well as I was expecting?’, ‘Why do users drop out at this point?’, and ‘What can we do to encourage more users to register?’… We’re asked to find problems our clients know exist somewhere in the site, and to help them fix them. It’s not about what people think or feel, it’s about observing user behaviour and isolating problems with the service.

How many times do you need to see a problem occur?

The great thing about searching for problems is that when you spot them you usually know it. If the zip breaks on your trousers it’s obvious there’s a problem. If you spill your coffee, spot a dent in your car… The problems are obvious. Finding problems with a website or service isn’t so clear cut, but when you watch someone struggle to complete a task because of the way it is designed, irrespective of the user’s level of skill or experience, you usually know you’ve uncovered an issue.

Let’s say we’ve just observed a user get very confused with your online checkout process. You’re pretty sure you have an issue which may be preventing people from buying. To be sure you test another person and they struggle in the same place. Then another person hits the same barrier. How many do you need to see before you’re convinced? Another 5 people? 10 more? 100? Do you need it to be statistically significant before you’re convinced?

What about discovering problems elsewhere? Let’s say you’ve noticed a couple of people trip on a kink in the carpet outside your office, or you’ve spotted a couple of people slipping up on some wet marble flooring. How many more people do you need to see hurt themselves before you’re willing to fix it?

Testing with more than 5 users results in diminishing returns

Sure you can test with more people, and there is a chance that you won’t uncover any issues until your 6th or 7th user. But it is very unlikely if you’ve designed your tests to cover the core areas of the service. What is more likely is that by your 6th user you’ll start to see the same patterns of behaviour repeat over and over, and your value from the tests start to diminish.

You may have seen the great diagram put forward by Jakob Nielsen to show the diminishing returns of testing with more than five users.

We agree with this entirely, and what many people forget about the accompanying article http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html  is that he advocates testing with five people, fixing the issues, and then testing again. This is very much the way we like to work. We encourage many clients, who come to us with plans to recruit 15/20 people, to reduce their scope and break the project into chunks that allow for design changes to be made before new users are brought in.

You don’t need high numbers of users to identify usability problems. Don’t confuse usability research with other types of market research. If you want to gauge opinions about competing brands, then five people isn’t anywhere near enough. But if you want to identify barriers to purchasing on your website five users is usually enough.

So, are you convinced? Are five users enough?

About Damian Rees

Damian is an applied psychologist but don't let that scare you, he's actually quite nice. With 12 years' experience in researching and designing for users in a variety of different contexts including web applications, voice recognition, and air traffic control interfaces. Follow Damian on twitter @damianrees