Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
User experience at Imperial
a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo
usability studies
Andrew Preater
Head of Libra...
These slides:
x.preater.com/primoux
Slides and notes
Imperial College London
User Experience as a strategic priority
• Two iterations of user testing
• Redesign Primo UI
• Re-launch
• Groundwork for third iteration of
testing
Summary Janua...
Round one: usability. January 2015
• “Discount usability testing” (Nielsen, 2009)
• Student Placement: Sherif Khedry of UC...
Usability round 1: results
Library Search
meets user
expectations
Usability round 1: results
• Library Search meets
expectations
• Discovery happens elsewhere
Discovery happens elsewhere
• Google et al.
• Library databases
• Citations
• Lecturers
• Friends
Usability round 1: results
• Library Search meets
expectations
• Discovery happens elsewhere
• User interface issues
UI issues
Where is
the book?
UI issues
1. Extra click
2. No emphasis
UI issues
?!
UI issues, ‘…and more’
User Experience testing: round 2
• 14 April planning
• 27 April UCL placement
student
• 5-8 May interviews & analysis
Research Questions: themes
• Purpose, construction, and
use of search and resources
• Presentation of information:
what ma...
• Grounded theory approach
• Coding of qualitative audiovisual
data from:
1. Interviews
2. Card sorting
Grounded theory as...
• Acknowledge & work with our
subjectivity as researchers
• Create abstract understanding
from observing users
• Support a...
[edited]
[This slide originally showed a
screenshot showing how we
record video of the user and their
screen]
Interview notes as research data
Facet card sorting
Questions for open coding
“What is this data a study of?
What do the data suggest?
Pronounce? Leave unsaid?
From whose poi...
“What can it look like?”
authority provides filtering technique
age of journal is part of authority
context sensitivity of...
Questions for focused coding
Which work better overall as categories?
Which give a better direction in developing
an overa...
Summary findings
Results: main themes
• Searching should be as
fast as possible
Results: main themes
• Searching should be as
fast as possible
• Searching should be
painless
Results: main themes
• Searching should be as
fast as possible
• Searching should be
painless
• Information is prioritised...
Redesign timeline
• July Complete redesign work on
sandbox
• 3 August acceptance testing
• 6 August cut over
• 6 August on...
Presentation on browse results
Moving and ordering facets
Tweaking language, removing jargon
Tweaking language, removing jargon
• E-Shelf  “Favourites”
• Advanced Search  “More search
options”
• “Expand my results...
E-journal scoped search
1
Cleaner, tidier login menu
Cleaner, tidier login menu
• Changes in scope and
schedule
Key issues after cutover
• Changes in scope and schedule
• Advanced search
• A-to-Z dilemma
Key issues after cutover
A-to-Z dilemma
Browse e-journals by title
A-to-Z usage 2014-15
• Changes in scope and schedule
• Advanced Search
• A-to-Z dilemma
• Prioritising search results
• Inconsistent metadata
K...
Lessons learned
• Involve staff early in UX Project
• Staff development
• Acceptance testing adds value
• Going live != success
• Be prepa...
[edited]
[This slide originally showed a
screenshot of our Primo relaunch
Trello board with current issues]
• Quantitative surveying
• “IOUX” UX investigation with
Bodleian Libraries. Focus on
PGT medics & NHS users
Round 2 ½ and ...
Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edn. London: Sage
Connaway, L.S., White, D., Lanclos, D., and Le Corn...
User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies
User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies

1,093 views

Published on

Presented to EPUG-UKI 2015 (the conference of the UK and Ireland Ex Libris users' group) at the British Library, Monday 5 October.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

User experience at Imperial: a case study of qualitative approaches to Primo usability studies

  1. 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
  2. 2. These slides: x.preater.com/primoux Slides and notes
  3. 3. Imperial College London
  4. 4. User Experience as a strategic priority
  5. 5. • Two iterations of user testing • Redesign Primo UI • Re-launch • Groundwork for third iteration of testing Summary January – September 2015
  6. 6. 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/
  7. 7. Usability round 1: results Library Search meets user expectations
  8. 8. Usability round 1: results • Library Search meets expectations • Discovery happens elsewhere
  9. 9. Discovery happens elsewhere • Google et al. • Library databases • Citations • Lecturers • Friends
  10. 10. Usability round 1: results • Library Search meets expectations • Discovery happens elsewhere • User interface issues
  11. 11. UI issues Where is the book?
  12. 12. UI issues 1. Extra click 2. No emphasis
  13. 13. UI issues ?!
  14. 14. UI issues, ‘…and more’
  15. 15. User Experience testing: round 2 • 14 April planning • 27 April UCL placement student • 5-8 May interviews & analysis
  16. 16. Research Questions: themes • Purpose, construction, and use of search and resources • Presentation of information: what matters to the user when selecting the right results?
  17. 17. • Grounded theory approach • Coding of qualitative audiovisual data from: 1. Interviews 2. Card sorting Grounded theory as a UX method
  18. 18. • 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
  19. 19. [edited] [This slide originally showed a screenshot showing how we record video of the user and their screen]
  20. 20. Interview notes as research data
  21. 21. Facet card sorting
  22. 22. 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
  23. 23. “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
  24. 24. 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
  25. 25. Summary findings
  26. 26. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible
  27. 27. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible • Searching should be painless
  28. 28. Results: main themes • Searching should be as fast as possible • Searching should be painless • Information is prioritised in selecting results
  29. 29. 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
  30. 30. Presentation on browse results
  31. 31. Moving and ordering facets
  32. 32. Tweaking language, removing jargon
  33. 33. Tweaking language, removing jargon • E-Shelf  “Favourites” • Advanced Search  “More search options” • “Expand my results” • Imperial house style changes
  34. 34. E-journal scoped search 1
  35. 35. Cleaner, tidier login menu
  36. 36. Cleaner, tidier login menu
  37. 37. • Changes in scope and schedule Key issues after cutover
  38. 38. • Changes in scope and schedule • Advanced search • A-to-Z dilemma Key issues after cutover
  39. 39. A-to-Z dilemma
  40. 40. Browse e-journals by title
  41. 41. A-to-Z usage 2014-15
  42. 42. • Changes in scope and schedule • Advanced Search • A-to-Z dilemma • Prioritising search results • Inconsistent metadata Key issues after cutover
  43. 43. Lessons learned
  44. 44. • 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
  45. 45. [edited] [This slide originally showed a screenshot of our Primo relaunch Trello board with current issues]
  46. 46. • Quantitative surveying • “IOUX” UX investigation with Bodleian Libraries. Focus on PGT medics & NHS users Round 2 ½ and Round 3 UX work
  47. 47. 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

×