Navigation Models: Efficiency versus user preference

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    Start with a definition What do we mean by nav models? Start – not talking about the IA (related) We are talking about how that IA is presented to the user How the user interacts with it to travel through the IA to locate the information they’re after

    We had pretty strong opinions about a lot of nav models 100s of usability test sessions between us Over the last 8-10 years A lot of that experience crammed into the last few Seen a lot of navigation models in action Good and bad We’ve noticed a few things about certain nav models Had no dedicated data All of our test sites – too many variables So we took four navigation models. 3 we’d seen a lot of and 1 we were curious about (+ 1 surprise inclusion!) Partnered with UQ who supplied some final year HCI students Start with those observations of the four models we evaluated What did we think about them based on our experience?

    Index pages What are they? Features Links Often supported by contextual information Provide that ‘scent of information’ Can include deep links – well grouped under headings Strengths Good for first time visitors – get their bearings Good for big complex websites (e.g. government – big content, diverse content sites Support other types of navigation well A very obvious manifestation of the IA Users don’t really mind clicking as long as they have a clear path to get where they need to go Breadcrumbs are a big help as well

    What doesn’t work? The content needs to be well chunked (ACU) Too much text can be as bad as too little (DES portal) Not too long – too much scrolling (DES example) 84 pages in print preview

    Widely used Almost a default Work well & users like them Especially for frequent use sites e.g. internets & extranets We like them if - tested IA & no ambiguous labels - Issues - Not a lot of support for users

    Widely used Almost a default Work well & users like them Especially for frequent use sites e.g. internets & extranets We like then if - tested IA & no ambiguous labels - Issues - Not a lot of support for users

    Tell the Fireman story

    Determine key target users - current and potential user groups Speak with business/content experts Speak with client facing staff Look at available customer data if available e.g. customer databases Look at any marketing reports or strategies

    * Caveat # 1 – not true megamenus – more contextual dropdowns * Caveat # 2 – landing page did not include in-page links on the home page which boss reckons completely invalidates the results.

    * Caveat – not true megamenu – contextual dropdowns

    Caveat

    We haven’t tested every nav model on the web e.g. overlooked horizontal tree/accordion style navs Pretty much correlates with other research conducted (except for megamenus and contextual dropdowns)

    Landing pages and dropdowns working together and apart in testing Testing with different types of fly-outs

    5 Favorites & 1 Group

    Navigation Models: Efficiency versus user preference - Presentation Transcript

    1. Navigation models… … how people find stuff David Humphreys … user preference vs. efficiency.
    2. Who are we? Some of our clients
    3. About David & Peak Usability
      • David Humphreys
      • Senior Usability Consultant
      • Peak Usability are Brisbane based
      • Usability & UX services & training
    4. Our collective thoughts Our team had pretty strong opinions about a lot of nav models… … but we had no solid test data based on navigation models alone
    5. The usual suspects Fly-out menus Dropdowns Index pages Mega-dropdowns Contextual dropdowns
    6. Index pages – What we like
      • Supports user decision making – provides context
    7. Index pages – What we don’t like Too much text! Too much scrolling! Operational Procedures under Policies & Procedures for QAS and QFRS. 1st of 84 pages only Related information or form appears as a link here which just looks like another link. Related information or form appears as a link here which just looks like another link.
    8. Vertical drop downs Good for sites with frequent repeat users e.g. intranets Work well with index pages Needs a good IA & labels
    9. Variant – Contextual vertical drop downs Provides more context to support user @iiNet Looks good, particularly the menus/left nav, 10 points for putting phone numbers right there in the 'contact' menu. - @ben_h
    10. Flyout menus
      • Evil!
      • Users hate them!
      “ that thing annoys me so much!”
      • So many issues
      • Don’t support users
      • Users will follow as far at they go
      • Don’t support natural mouse movement
      • Poor fine motor skills? No chance
    11. Mega drop downs
      • We have never tested a site with them
      • EBay uses them & Amazon used to. Why?
      • Allow clearer chunking with subheadings
      “ We know from user testing that mega drop-downs work” Alertbox 23 March 2009
    12. Mega drop downs
    13. Mega drop downs
    14. Aims of the research
      • Meet our curiosity and provide evidence
      • Resolve office arguments
      • Which nav models:
        • Do users prefer ?
        • Is the most efficient to use?
        • Has the best completion rate?
      • These became our test measures
    15. Approach
      • Worked with final year HCI students form University of Queensland
      • 2 user groups using different user bases and website IAs
        • QLD RSL (9 users)
        • QUT Library (7 users)
      • Built ‘pure’ interfaces – ‘white sites’
      • The IA and the UI
      • Fewer variables
      • Tested 4 scenarios on each nav UI
    16. Tool we recommended - Naview by Volkside
    17. What was actually tested – RSL Group Drop downs Fly-outs
    18. What was actually tested (RSL Group) Index pages “ Mega-menu” or contextual dropdowns
    19. QUT Library prototypes for testing Drop downs Fly-outs
    20. QUT Library prototypes for testing Index pages Mega drop down
    21. Early results
    22. Navigation model preference – RSL group
      • Users preferred mega menus (contextual dropdowns) for efficiency*
      • Landing pages were seen as inefficient*
      • Users preferred drop downs for ease of use
      • Fly-outs were seen as hard to use.
      Source: UQ Research Group 1 Source: UQ Research Group 1
      • Single dropdowns & homepage landing pages were preferred
      • The mega dropdown menu was least preferred
      • Fly outs were better than expected
      Navigation model preference – QUT group Source: UQ Research Group 2
    23. Efficiency (time) - RSL group
      • Mega menus (contextual drop downs) were most efficient!*
      • Split the difference between dropdowns & landing pages
      • The fly-outs caused difficulty for this group
      Source: UQ Research Group 1 Source: UQ Research Group 1
    24. Efficiency (time) – QUT Library
      • The fly-outs performed well for this group
      • What was different?
      • Homepage style landing page also a strong performer
      • The two dropdowns were generally less efficient
      Source: UQ Research Group 2 Source: UQ Research Group 2
    25. Task completion rate – RSL group
      • Mega menus (contextual drop-down) performed the best*
      • Fly-outs the worst
      • Landing pages caused some problems*
      • Dropdowns performed marginally worse
      Source: UQ Research Group 1
    26. QUT Library task completion
      • Landing page was best performer
      • Followed by fly-outs
      • Seemed to be general difficulty with Tasks 3&4
      Source: UQ Research Group 2
    27. Thanks to our Research Students
      • Group 1 – RSL
        • Chin Zhun (Jerry) Ong
        • Jason Antony Marles
        • Chin Wai Ng
        • Jared Robert Mallett
      • Group 2 – QUT Library
        • Daniel Jon Dawson
        • Jacob Ryan Appleton
        • Jenny Spiers
    28. A few caveats
      • We haven’t tested every nav model on the web
      • Not statistically valid
      • Not conclusive
      • We have more to do!
      • Raises more questions than it answers
    29. Conclusions & Questions
      • Refine further research - landing pages and dropdowns together
      • Contextual drop downs are remarkably usable
      • Should we stop using fly-outs? Can you have a good one?
      • What about mega drop downs?
      • Was age a factor?
      • Which nav should I use on my site?
      It depends!
    30. Thank you David Humphreys [email_address] @peakusability @davemonkey http:// www.volkside.com/go/ozia /
    SlideShare Zeitgeist 2009

    + Peak UsabilityPeak Usability Nominate

    custom

    514 views, 5 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Presented at OZIA 09. Thoughts on navigation models more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 514
      • 514 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 5
    • Downloads 36
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Groups / Events