IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador

The International Image Interoperability
Framework (IIIF): raising awareness of
the user benefits for scholarly editions
Results of the usability testing conducted on the UV
and Mirador for my bachelor’s thesis
Julien A. Raemy, LIS Student (HEG-ID)
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Background
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Context (1)
• IIIF Wonder
• Heard of the IIIF initiative at the University of Basel’s
Digital Humanities Lab
• IIIF Working Groups Meeting in the Hague in
October 2016
• Appraised the potential of IIIF-compliant viewers
such as the Universal Viewer and Mirador
• IIIF 3rd Goal
• To develop, cultivate and document shared
technologies, such as image servers and web clients,
that provide a world-class user experience in
viewing, comparing, manipulating and annotating
images.
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Context (2)
•Library and Information Science (LIS)
Bachelor’s thesis: February-July 2017
•NIE-INE – National infrastructure for
(scholarly) editions in Switzerland
• Project funded by Swissuniversities (like e-
codices)
• Coordination conducted at the University of
Basel
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Objectives
1. Writing a comprehensive description of the
International Image Interoperability Framework
(IIIF) for potential new implementers.
2. Conducting usability tests to show the benefits
of the UV and Mirador in terms of efficiency
and satisfaction.
3. Assessing the interests of deploying and using
IIIF-compliant technologies for complex and
large scientific editions.
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Usability versus user experience
• Usability
• A system which makes users able to achieve their
goals in a specified context
• Learnability, Efficiency, Memorability, Few errors,
Satisfaction (Jakob Nielsen, Usability Engineering,
1993)
• UX
• ‘Everything that touches upon someone’s experience
with a product’ (Don Norman)
• Much broader concept than usability
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Usability testing
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Scenario and tests
• A scenario that comprised tasks and surveys
• on the UV
• on Mirador
• An A/B session
• IIIF Sandbox (or ‘SandbUX’) on GitHub. Installation
on a server for the duration of the tests
• UV 2.0.1 – Mirador 2.3.0
• Remote usability tests with Loop11 and in-person
tests with Morae
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Assessed!
Measurement approach (1)
• Satisfaction
• Expectations, Fun, Pleasure
• 3 criteria from Usefulness, Satisfaction, and Ease (USE) –
Arnold M. Lund, 2001
• Average grade from 1 to 5 based on a Likert scale
• Efficiency
• Overall relative efficiency – Anton Sergeev, 2010
• Ratio of the time taken by the participants who successfully
completed a given task in relation to the total time taken by
all participants
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Measurement approach (2)
• Perceived usability
• System Usability Scale (SUS) – John Brooke, 1986
• 10 items (positive and negative statements) on a Likert scale
• Giving a score from 0 to 100 (percentile ranking)
• Interpretation by giving the score a letter-grade (A+ to F) –
Jeff Sauro, 2011
• A/B testing
• Observational task followed by a survey
• 7 aspects tested (size and choice of icons, metadata
presentation, overall aesthetic, etc.)
• 4 possibilities: UV, Mirador, Both are equally good, neither
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Pilot test
•Remote-ish test conducted at the HEG on
the 5th April with 29 LIS students during a
user-centred design course
•Scenario carried out in French
•To test the test
•Buffering issues with the first task on
Mirador
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Target test
•Remote test conducted between the 20th
April and the 8th May 2017 with the
broader DH community: 45 participants
•Dissemination of the URL on Slack and
Twitter. Discussed during a IIIF
Community Call (26th April)
•The test was not accessible for 2 days
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
In-person test
• Tests conducted between the 25th April and the
10th May 2017. The thinking aloud protocol was
applied.
• Recorded sessions (voice and screen) with the
target audience. 7 people participated.
• Slight modifications of the
scenario/measurement approach
• No SUS to make it shorter
• Task completion instead of efficiency
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Results and findings
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Feedback
+
• Intuitive and simple
• Search within
• Share and embed
• Download
–
• Doesn’t offer enough
possibilities for
researchers
• Confusion around
numbering
(image/page)
• The pinpoint
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador
Feedback
• Powerful
• Comparison*
• Annotation
• Image manipulation
• Finding how to
rotate an image
• Confusion between
Change Layout and
View type
• Pan and zoom
controls
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
+ –
IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador
IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador
Outcomes
•Both interfaces are overall satisfying or
very satisfying
•The UV is highly efficient and simple to
use
•Mirador is efficient and powerful
•Their perceived usability ranks from
average to excellent
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Aggregated results
Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy
2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
Pilot test Target test In-person test
UV Mirador UV Mirador UV Mirador
Satisfaction (out of 5) 3.75 3.49 4.26 3.81 4.19 3.67
Efficiency 88.9% 73% 100% 82% - -
Task completion - - - -
89.29% completed with
ease
10.71% completed with
difficulty
0% failed to complete
42.86% completed with
ease
50% completed with
difficulty
10.71% failed to complete
SUS 72.76 (B-) 64.05 (C-) 86.33 (A) 74.67 (B) - -
A/B
UV: 6/7
UV, Mirador, and Both: 1/7
UV: 2/7
Mirador: 1/7
Both: 4/7
UV: 2/7
UV and Both: 3/7
Both: 2/7
1 of 21

More Related Content

What's hot(20)

WikidataWikidata
Wikidata
Anja Jentzsch1.6K views
Very Gentle Linked Data WorkshopVery Gentle Linked Data Workshop
Very Gentle Linked Data Workshop
Adrian Stevenson3.2K views
Methodological Guidelines for Publishing Linked DataMethodological Guidelines for Publishing Linked Data
Methodological Guidelines for Publishing Linked Data
Boris Villazón-Terrazas1.2K views
International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF)International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF)
International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF)
Centre for Digital Scholarship, Leiden University Libraries342 views
Integrating IIIF and Mirador at HarvardIntegrating IIIF and Mirador at Harvard
Integrating IIIF and Mirador at Harvard
Visual Resources Association302 views
Butigan vucaj dh_ildeButigan vucaj dh_ilde
Butigan vucaj dh_ilde
Tamara Butigan184 views
It summit2015It summit2015
It summit2015
kevin_donovan2.6K views
WebART in 10 minutesWebART in 10 minutes
WebART in 10 minutes
Jaap Kamps2.9K views
JCDL 2015 Tutorial Opening SlidesJCDL 2015 Tutorial Opening Slides
JCDL 2015 Tutorial Opening Slides
Robert H. McDonald1.6K views
NECTAR_VRE1NECTAR_VRE1
NECTAR_VRE1
Craig Bellamy169 views

Similar to IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador(20)

Cobweb: In Pursuit of ConclusionsCobweb: In Pursuit of Conclusions
Cobweb: In Pursuit of Conclusions
COBWEB Project183 views
COBWEB Project: Overall Project Status and DeliverablesCOBWEB Project: Overall Project Status and Deliverables
COBWEB Project: Overall Project Status and Deliverables
EDINA, University of Edinburgh1K views
Outcomes Visual Navigation ProjectOutcomes Visual Navigation Project
Outcomes Visual Navigation Project
TimelessFuture548 views

Recently uploaded(20)

Tunable Laser (1).pptxTunable Laser (1).pptx
Tunable Laser (1).pptx
Hajira Mahmood21 views
Java Platform Approach 1.0 - Picnic MeetupJava Platform Approach 1.0 - Picnic Meetup
Java Platform Approach 1.0 - Picnic Meetup
Rick Ossendrijver24 views
ChatGPT and AI for Web DevelopersChatGPT and AI for Web Developers
ChatGPT and AI for Web Developers
Maximiliano Firtman161 views

IIIF Pre-conference - Usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador

  • 1. The International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF): raising awareness of the user benefits for scholarly editions Results of the usability testing conducted on the UV and Mirador for my bachelor’s thesis Julien A. Raemy, LIS Student (HEG-ID) 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 2. Background Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 3. Context (1) • IIIF Wonder • Heard of the IIIF initiative at the University of Basel’s Digital Humanities Lab • IIIF Working Groups Meeting in the Hague in October 2016 • Appraised the potential of IIIF-compliant viewers such as the Universal Viewer and Mirador • IIIF 3rd Goal • To develop, cultivate and document shared technologies, such as image servers and web clients, that provide a world-class user experience in viewing, comparing, manipulating and annotating images. Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 4. Context (2) •Library and Information Science (LIS) Bachelor’s thesis: February-July 2017 •NIE-INE – National infrastructure for (scholarly) editions in Switzerland • Project funded by Swissuniversities (like e- codices) • Coordination conducted at the University of Basel Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 5. Objectives 1. Writing a comprehensive description of the International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF) for potential new implementers. 2. Conducting usability tests to show the benefits of the UV and Mirador in terms of efficiency and satisfaction. 3. Assessing the interests of deploying and using IIIF-compliant technologies for complex and large scientific editions. Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 6. Usability versus user experience • Usability • A system which makes users able to achieve their goals in a specified context • Learnability, Efficiency, Memorability, Few errors, Satisfaction (Jakob Nielsen, Usability Engineering, 1993) • UX • ‘Everything that touches upon someone’s experience with a product’ (Don Norman) • Much broader concept than usability Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 7. Usability testing Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 8. Scenario and tests • A scenario that comprised tasks and surveys • on the UV • on Mirador • An A/B session • IIIF Sandbox (or ‘SandbUX’) on GitHub. Installation on a server for the duration of the tests • UV 2.0.1 – Mirador 2.3.0 • Remote usability tests with Loop11 and in-person tests with Morae Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican Assessed!
  • 9. Measurement approach (1) • Satisfaction • Expectations, Fun, Pleasure • 3 criteria from Usefulness, Satisfaction, and Ease (USE) – Arnold M. Lund, 2001 • Average grade from 1 to 5 based on a Likert scale • Efficiency • Overall relative efficiency – Anton Sergeev, 2010 • Ratio of the time taken by the participants who successfully completed a given task in relation to the total time taken by all participants Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 10. Measurement approach (2) • Perceived usability • System Usability Scale (SUS) – John Brooke, 1986 • 10 items (positive and negative statements) on a Likert scale • Giving a score from 0 to 100 (percentile ranking) • Interpretation by giving the score a letter-grade (A+ to F) – Jeff Sauro, 2011 • A/B testing • Observational task followed by a survey • 7 aspects tested (size and choice of icons, metadata presentation, overall aesthetic, etc.) • 4 possibilities: UV, Mirador, Both are equally good, neither Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 11. Pilot test •Remote-ish test conducted at the HEG on the 5th April with 29 LIS students during a user-centred design course •Scenario carried out in French •To test the test •Buffering issues with the first task on Mirador Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 12. Target test •Remote test conducted between the 20th April and the 8th May 2017 with the broader DH community: 45 participants •Dissemination of the URL on Slack and Twitter. Discussed during a IIIF Community Call (26th April) •The test was not accessible for 2 days Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 13. In-person test • Tests conducted between the 25th April and the 10th May 2017. The thinking aloud protocol was applied. • Recorded sessions (voice and screen) with the target audience. 7 people participated. • Slight modifications of the scenario/measurement approach • No SUS to make it shorter • Task completion instead of efficiency Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 14. Results and findings Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 15. Feedback + • Intuitive and simple • Search within • Share and embed • Download – • Doesn’t offer enough possibilities for researchers • Confusion around numbering (image/page) • The pinpoint Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 17. Feedback • Powerful • Comparison* • Annotation • Image manipulation • Finding how to rotate an image • Confusion between Change Layout and View type • Pan and zoom controls Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican + –
  • 20. Outcomes •Both interfaces are overall satisfying or very satisfying •The UV is highly efficient and simple to use •Mirador is efficient and powerful •Their perceived usability ranks from average to excellent Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican
  • 21. Aggregated results Julien A. Raemy @julsraemy 2017 IIIF Conference – The Vatican Pilot test Target test In-person test UV Mirador UV Mirador UV Mirador Satisfaction (out of 5) 3.75 3.49 4.26 3.81 4.19 3.67 Efficiency 88.9% 73% 100% 82% - - Task completion - - - - 89.29% completed with ease 10.71% completed with difficulty 0% failed to complete 42.86% completed with ease 50% completed with difficulty 10.71% failed to complete SUS 72.76 (B-) 64.05 (C-) 86.33 (A) 74.67 (B) - - A/B UV: 6/7 UV, Mirador, and Both: 1/7 UV: 2/7 Mirador: 1/7 Both: 4/7 UV: 2/7 UV and Both: 3/7 Both: 2/7

Editor's Notes

  1. Hi everyone, I’m Julien Raemy and I am Library and Information Science student in Geneva. I’m very happy to be here to talk about the usability research I did on the Universal Viewer and Mirador for my bachelor’s thesis.
  2. First, some background information
  3. I heard about IIIF last year during an internship at the University of Basel. I thought it was a very interesting inititiative but still a bit vague to me, so I decided to go to the Working Groups Meeting in the Hague where I assessed the potential of the IIIF ecosystem. IIIF Website – 3rd Goal
  4. As a student in my last semester, I've got to do a bachelor's thesis. I started this assignement in February and will be done next month. I already thought to take IIIF as a research topic right after the WG meeting and... when I talked about it to one of my professors, he told me to include the NIE-INE project as my target audience. NIE-INE aims to build a national platform in Swizerland for scholarly editions.
  5. When my research topic was validated, I desined a document where I laid out 3 objectives... 1) Write a comprehensive description of IIIF. Especially in Switzerland where e-codices is the only IIIF-compliant collection available 2) Usability testing on the UV and Mirador. 2 attributes: efficiency and satisfaction 3) NIE-INE Assessment
  6. 68 is considered as average – C
  7. SUS: enough inputs from remarks and interactions
  8. Some results and feedbacks that I received. + 1 video + heat maps
  9. Here is a recorded task where participants had first to go to a specific page. Almost all participants during the in-person tests tried to use the pinpoint to navigate through digital assets. They were quite frustrated that I didn't work as they expected.
  10. As you may have noticed, the specificity of each viewer was greatly appreciated. However, I must say that adding a new item is also the feature that was the most problematic during the usability test.
  11. Heat maps – Pilot test Have a look at the Pan and zoom controls
  12. Heat maps – Target test
  13. Even if it might be a bit too much of information, I wanted to show you some figures. My thesis and the full results will of course be availabe as soon as it’s been reviewed. The target test gave both viewers better results (which is a good sign)