This particular assignment provides information and analysis over a usability test conducted over the MuckBootCompany.com website.

1. Usability Test for MuckBootCompany.com
Nathan A. Meeker
Test Preparation
User experience is the overall experience of a person using a product such as a website or
computer application, while regarding how easily the person is able to use it. Having a usability
test for the Muck Boot Company will help designers better improve their website to benefit user
experience and needs.
To prepare for the usability test there are a few important factors to take into account.
Some of these factors used as instructions and preparations for the usability test include, test
location, time of day, proper participants, and proper equipment. Although having these
preparations can be crucial to having a successful test, conducting the tests myself (as the
conductor) is necessary as well. To acquire the best possible results I went through the script and
task sheet for the Muck Boot Company before doing the same to my testers. Since I am already
familiar with the Muck Boot Company website, I skipped the “Initial Site Thoughts” portion of
the script. There are four tasks to complete, each associating with a scenario. In order to have a
general understanding of what is happening when I attempt the tasks myself, a scenario was
presented in the “Tasks” sheet stating; “You have just volunteered to spend a week in Louisiana
helping hurricane victims clean their homes and businesses. You need a pair of sturdy,
waterproof boots within a week and your budget is $140, total.”
Following the instructions provided, I began to work on each of the tasks as if I were one
of the testers. Overall, the first task seemed to go smoothly. The task asks to determine how
many boot options on the site are less than $140. To begin the task, I went to the top navigation

2. area and clicked on the “Men’s” link. Upon arriving at the next page, I immediately saw the
“Shop All” and clicked there. Next, I went to the left sidebar and entered in the correct pricing
options associated with the budget given. I proceeded to examine all of the boots shown, to
determine which ones are waterproof and below my budget, making this the only point in the
task where I encountered any problems. It proved to be timely and difficult because the site
forced me to click on every boot in order to get the information needed. In the end, I found
fifteen boots under $140.
The next task informs the user that they will need to have steel-toe constructed boots, at
the same time; they will need to find which options offer this in the boots previously found.
Since I am already on the same page of boots where I found the results, all I had to do is find
which ones (if any) provided steel-toe construction. To begin, I skimmed through the “boot
names” to see if any showed anything regarding steel-toe construction. In doing so, I only found
one boot that fit the description called “Chore Hi Steel-Toe”. By clicking on that specific boot, I
looked through the description area to make sure the boot was steel toe. This description area
located within each boot usually provides all the information needed about the product, which
lead to helping me complete task one and two.
(Shown in Figure 1 to the right). Looking back
on this task and processes taken, I was able to
complete it with little to no struggle at all.
Task three involves the user determining the cheapest shipping option to receive the
boots within roughly six days and determining the costs associated with them. Again, since I was
still located on the same page as before, my first instinct was to look within that page. In doing
so, I found the “Shipping” option located to the right of the description area. A short paragraph

3. provided by the company said, “Muckbootcompany.com offers FREE Shipping and FREE
Returns for all orders within the continental US. Click here to learn more about our expedited
shipping options.” To me, this option seemed like a great way to complete the task, so I clicked
on the “Click here” portion to learn more. The associated page named “Shipping & Returns” was
still a part of the website, but forced me to a new tab. The graph and information presented on
this page seemed to give me trouble as to which delivery option is the best fit. Even though it
said FREE shipping in the continental US, I was unable to find exactly how long that shipping
option would take to arrive. After taking into account the weekend hours and short time period
given, I ultimately made the decision that the shipping option “UPS 3 Day” was the best fit, only
ranging at a $13 increase per order.
Last but not least, task four asks the user to choose the best boot option and to determine
the total order amount, including shipping. This task proved to be difficult for me because
shipping costs and taxes could raise the amount of the boots past my available budget. To start, I
added the “Chore Hi Steel-Toe” to my bag, and
proceeded to follow up with that page. After going
through a process of entering information, I was
displayed the amount of the boot with tax/shipping
included (shown in Figure 2 to the right). This shoe
proved to be too costly with every delivery option I
chose. Next, I resorted to using the search bar within
the website, searching for “steel-toe” boots. Two
boots came up, one being the “Chore Hi Steel-Toe”. The other boot was misinterpreted as a
steel-toe boot. It was at that time I realized the only way to get the right boot was to use the 10%

4. discount given in the pop-up for my first order. After my development, I was able to enter my
discount code and receive a total price of $138.99 on the boots, making the “Chore Hi Steel-Toe”
my best option.
Choosing Participants
Tester 1: Joe Suchan
The first tester that I chose to run through the usability test on muckbootcompany.com
was Joe Suchan. Joe is an 18-year-old sophomore and a full-time student at Northwest Missouri
State University. He is studying Interactive Digital Media with an emphasis in Computer Science
Programming. Aside from devoting his time as a college student, Joe is involved in the fraternity
Sigma Tau Gamma, Adink Advertising club, Soccer club, and is a Student Ambassador. As you
can tell, Joe is a dedicated student and is involved in the community. Even though Joe does not
work during the school year, he provides himself with alternative extracurricular opportunities
such as soccer, basketball, and occasionally working out. One of the many reasons why I chose
Joe to be my participant was because his above-average knowledge about using computers.
Being a Computer Science major in college allows him to have a good understanding on what
most e-commerce websites are like. Joe has had no previous knowledge about the Muck Boot
Company. However, he did admit to being an “advocate” of online shopping, making yet another
reason why he was such a good fit for being a participant. It is important to know that even
though Joe is sophisticated with computers, he is still a potential customer for the Muck Boot
Company and can help provide the best results from the test because of it.
In the usability test script by Steve Krug, there were a few brief questions provided to ask
the tester. The first few were general questions that got an explanation in the previous paragraph.

5. The next question asked, “Roughly how many hours a week altogether would you say you spend
using the internet, including web browsing and email, at work and at home?” Joe took a second
to think, but concluded that he is roughly on the internet around 45 hours a week. Next, the
script wanted to know a percentage split between the uses of social media and browsing. A
question that seemed easy to Joe; who answered with 60% social media and 40% web browsing.
He said, “It’s a lot easier to roam social media and get distracted there, other than browsing the
web.” Finally, Joe considered himself as a high experience user of the internet. The concluding
question asked whether they would consider themselves a high or low experience user of the
internet. The reasoning behind his answer related to his previous experiences with shopping
online, as well as how his major exposes him to potential tips and tricks regarding this.
Environment for Joe Suchan
Location of Test
Given Joe was in charge of picking the environment he felt most comfortable and spent
the most time browsing the internet; he chose to go to the J.W. Jones Student Union located in
the heart of the Northwest campus. With our location located on the second floor, the cafeteria is
just below us and plays a part as to why he chose this location because he explained that he goes
to this same spot in the Union every Tuesday and Thursday around lunchtime, making it the
location where he feels most comfortable interacting and web browsing. Having such a strong
familiarity with the surroundings can help comfort the user and their experiences when taking the
test.

6. Physical Environment
The physical environment of our testing location can be described in many ways, but can
be interpreted in my opinion as “chaotic”. We were sitting at a table positioned directly in front
of the Office of Student Involvement doors. Our table was an older wooden one that had a
tendency of leaning to the sides and was one of many that lined up in a row, making one long
table. With the location we had, there was a constant flow of people coming from both directions
in front of where we were sitting. The room was radiating a wide variety of sounds ranging from
the Chick fil a worker yelling out orders to the conversations and laughter of passing students.
Joe and I were more prone to getting distracted during the tasks because of this.
Technical Environment
Joe was using his student laptop provided by Northwest Missouri State. The laptop is an
hp EliteBook and has a black keyboard on a silver surface. Since I have the same computer, I
was able to locate keys and commands to help taking notes when examining the test. He was
connected to the campus Wi-Fi called “NWMSU_Secure”. Having the environment he chose
also played a problem as to how fast the internet would be since there were so many other
students in the same location and on the same network. In the beginning, I asked Joe to select the
browser he is most familiar with and he went with Google Chrome. He said, “Google Chrome
has always been my go-to, it’s the browser that I have used for the majority of my homework
and online shopping”. With Google Chrome being the browser he chose, he only had one add-on
called “Grammarly”. This only benefited him when he would be typing within Chrome and it
would give recommendations if a word was typed incorrectly or if incorrect grammar was used.
Making it not directly relate to any of the tasks in the usability test.

7. Tester 2: Brittany Hutchens
The second tester that I chose to run through the usability test on muckbootcompany.com
was Brittany Hutchens. Brittany is a 20-year-old Junior and full-time student at Northwest
Missouri State University. She is currently studying Wildlife Ecology and Public Relations.
Going into college, Brittany was planning to only major in Public Relations. However, her love
for animals and wildlife strived her to pursue the major she has now, and even becoming a
member of the wildlife club on campus. Part of her reasoning for switching may be because of
her occupation in the summer. Brittany lives in Council Bluffs, IA while not at school and has
the summer job of a Zoo Caretaker at Henry Doorly Zoo in Omaha, NE. Aside from school and
work; her hobbies consist of watching TV, shopping, and socializing with friends. One of the
reasons why I chose her is because of her avid interest in online shopping. Brittany has had the
history of buying a plethora of different items from e-commerce websites and even has an
Amazon Prime account to improve her shopping tendencies. The difference between Brittany
and Joe is her deep interest in online shopping. While Joe enjoys to shop online when in need of
something offered on the internet, Brittany frequently checks for deals and is even signed up for
newsletters on sites. Some of her favorite websites to shop online include Victoria Secret and
Target.
Using the same Usability Test Script and asking Brittany the same questions as Joe, she
presented me with a different range of answers; proving how both of the users chosen are
different and will help in the usability test by the answers/struggles they experienced. In response
to the first question, Brittany predicted that she uses the internet roughly 80 hours a week. Next, I
asked Brittany what the split between social media and web browsing would be. Answering with
50% social media & 50% web browsing, she said, “Even though I am always doing homework

8. and shopping on the internet, I will frequently check my social media as I do”. Brittany is
someone who (in my opinion) has a good general knowledge of computers, yet still being
substantially different from Joe. To have someone like Brittany may even be more beneficial
towards the test because of the personality she potentially shares with other (potential)
customers. She answered my last question about being a high or low experience user of the
internet by associating herself as a high experience user. When considering my reasoning behind
choosing participants, I also wanted to make sure there was someone of each gender to take the
usability test.
Environment for Brittany Hutchens
Location of Test
Unlike my other tester-Joe, Brittany is most comfortable browsing the internet and social
media at her own apartment. When I asked Brittany where her common environment was, she
answered with, “I keep having the problem that when I am home alone and bored I will go online
shopping and end up buying something, so probably my apartment”. She lives with two
roommates, both being girls and students at Northwest Missouri State University. We took the
usability test in her living room. Another reason as to why Brittany chose this location is because
she felt it would keep herself from getting distracted and stay focused enough to help supply me
with the best results.
Physical Environment
Since the location of the test is in the living room of an apartment, there are multiple
physical points to cover. We were sitting on a traditional brown sofa with a coffee table located
directly in front. Brittany felt this was the place she finds herself sitting when on the internet the

9. most. The room was pained tan and had multiple items such as portraits, family pictures, letters,
and other various items hanging from them. There was a lamp turned on and located directly to
our right during the test. Aside from the lamp, the room was illuminated by four windows evenly
distributed around the room. Her roommates were not actually home at the time, making the risk
of distractions from that standpoint lower. The only distracting element while taking the test
were the individuals who live in the apartment located directly above. An occasional “thud” in
the ceiling broke the silence in the room. Lastly, her apartment had a certain flowery smell that
originated from the living room.
Technical Environment
Brittany was using her student laptop provided by Northwest Missouri State. Same as
Joe, her computer is an hp EliteBook and has a black keyboard on a silver surface. Brittany had
the computer plugged in at the time because she was running low in battery and did not want the
computer to shut off in the middle of the test. Being located at her apartment, she connected to
her private router with the service provider of Suddenlink. Unlike what you would normally
think, the internet speed seemed to resemble the speed of an on-campus location. Again, she used
Google Chrome just as Joe did. Being such a popular browser, Brittany has used it for most of
her collegiate career as well. Adobe Acrobat was the only add-on she had downloaded to Google
Chrome. Apart from what she used, I noticed that there was an overabundance of tabs and
programs running while we were taking the test. Having too much running at once may have
even damaged the internet’s ability to run quicker.

10. Test Results
Initial Site Thoughts
Beginning with initial site thoughts, the very first words my participants said upon their
arrival to the Muck Boot Company website were interesting to compare. When Joe first reached
the site, his first words were, “Oh, I like the navigation at the top and how the logo is centered
right in the middle”. Now, when Brittany got to the site, she said, “Okay, so first I really like
how their logo in the middle pops out because of the white background”. Because both of my
participants had a similar first impression does not mean they will have overall similar thoughts
on the website. More specifically, Brittany proceeded to say nothing but good comments,
whereas Joe tended to express how he did not like certain points. For example, Brittany
expressed how much she loved the pictures, whereas Joe expressed how the images were “too
big” and unnecessary.
Both participants received a pop-up advertisement offering a discount if they signed up
for newsletters. This point of interest seemed to annoy the participants more than appeal to them.
Joe explained that he did not like the pop-up, but appreciated that they offered the discount and
are putting in the effort to help the visitor. Brittany on the other hand showed how she felt about
the pop-up by letting out an “ughh” when displayed on her screen. While thinking out loud, she
mentioned that she never actually uses the pop ups right away because of the annoyance of
newsletters and emails sent following. She needs to become an avid user of the website before
actually applying an account with the website.
As both participants are scrolling through the website, each have some interesting
comments and areas they pointed out. For example, as Joe scrolled through the homepage of

11. MuckBootCompany.com, he had the tendency to point out all of the widgets and specific content
within the website. These options included the “gallery” section, sub navigation, and footer area.
In my opinion, he runs through the same thought processes that I would, yet different from
Brittany’s thought processes. Even though Joe was simple when going through the homepage, I
was able to get a recommendation from him. He proposed that the image used near the top of the
page was excessively big, and should consider being replaced by the #MUCKBOOTS gallery
currently below it. His reasoning for this recommendation was that having too big of an image
can be slightly overwhelming to users and having something simple like the gallery could keep
the user engaged.
Brittany seemed to go more into depth about each item located on the homepage. She
stopped and commented about how they have a hashtag, which in her opinion can give
credibility to the website and make her feel more comfortable using them as a shopping source.
She also voiced her opinion as to how the price of the three boots located at the bottom of the
page was a “turn off”. Using those words exactly, she thought seeing those high prices displayed
on the home page was a bad start for her if she was looking for a pair of good priced boots. Aside
from everything Brittany presented in her initial site thoughts, she too had a comment I found
extremely important. When about halfway scrolling down the homepage for the first time, she
said, “Oh, hold on, I want to check and see if they have a reliable source or if they have their
privacy policy”. Since Brittany is such an avid online shopper, she was able to think about a
small, but important detail associated with e-commerce sites. She followed her comment by

12. scrolling to the bottom and eventually finding the area where the companies “Terms and
Conditions” as well as “Privacy Policy” are shown (shown in Figure 3 below).
Apart from Joe’s recommendation and Brittany’s analysis, the testers consistently pointed
out the images on the homepage to be excessive. There were also brief comments coming from
both participants about how there was so much scrolling involved with the homepage. They
similarly felt that a homepage should not have the amount of scrolling as the Muck Boot
Company website does.
Scenario: You have just volunteered to spend a week in Louisiana helping hurricane
victims clean their homes and businesses. You need a pair of sturdy, waterproof boots
within a week and your budget is $140, total.
Task 1: Determine how many boot options are less than $140.
Summary for Both Testers:
Tester 1:
Joe Suchan
Tester 2:
Brittany Hutchens Average
Average Satisfaction
(1=terrible, 5=excellent)
“4” (good) “3” (neutral) 3.5 / 5

13. The information I received from Joe in this task closely related to the answers and
problems I encountered when doing the tasks myself. He began by going step-by-step in the
same direction as I did. First, going to “Men’s” in the top navigation, then going to “Shop All”
and followed by entering the correct information in the menus located to the left side of the
screen. Joe concluded that only 14 boots are located within the site under $140.
Brittany seemed to take a similar, yet different approach to finding the information. She
began by entering the “Women’s” section just as Joe did, then instead of going to “Shop All”,
she scrolled down to find the area called “Rain Boots” and clicked there. Realizing that she
might have made a mistake by going into this section, Brittany proceeded to switch pages to
“Outdoor Activity” followed by another switch to “Work Boots”. In the end, she took a
significantly longer amount of time then Joe did, but ended with roughly the same result of 11
boots under $140.
Highlights
Problem #1: While conducting the test, each participant came across
one particular problem. When searching for boot prices, the menu
options provided to find all boots under $140 were not displaying the
correct boots when checked. For example, when Joe arrived at
“Men’s” > “Shop All”, he assumed the numbers (results) displayed
to the right of the “Pricing” menu options were correct. However,
when he checked the boxes and started searching through boots, he
found that out of the 23 results presented in the menu, he was only able to find 14 boots to
confirm the price. (Shown in Figure 4 to the left).

14. Problem #2: Both testers were confused as to how they should go about completing the task. For
example, when Brittany was in the process of counting which shoes were under $140, she asked,
“wait, do the boots that I pick still have to be sturdy and waterproof?” The testers could not quite
grasp if the boots they choose have to fit the scenario or not. The thought process that Brittany
was going through directly related to this issue. Even though she was able to come up with a
good estimate on the amount of boots under $140, the task proved to be more difficult and time
consuming because she had to go into each individual boot to see if they are waterproof.
Problem #3: Each tester also had an issue when determining gender in the category menus. For
example, when Joe was searching for boot prices in “Shop All”, he found that not all the boots
under $140 were located in the “men” gender area. When going to “unisex”, Joe was able to find
a few boots that were not located in each category. This lead to him taking more unnecessary
time to figure out his answer to the task.
Alignment to Heuristic: Consistency and Standards
The reason why I chose Consistency and Standards to be the most relevant with my test
results can be explained directly from the definition itself. In this specific heuristic by Jakob
Nielsen, it states, “Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or
actions mean the same thing.” This directly relates to how the testers were unable to determine
which boots were available in both unisex and male/female gender in problem #3. In the
definition, the statements “mean the same thing” and “wonder” are important to keep in mind

15. when creating a site that is easy to navigate. In addition, both testers wondered and were asking
if the two meant the same thing, making this heuristic relate to the results the most.
Task 2: You have just been advised that you’ll need steel-toe constructed boots. Of the
options you’ve found, which offer steel-toe construction?
Summary for Both Testers:
Tester 1:
Joe Suchan
Tester 2:
Brittany Hutchens Average
Average Satisfaction
(1=terrible, 5=excellent)
“3” (neutral) “2” (poor) 2.5 / 5
From the “Men’s” > “Shop All” page that Joe was already located on, he began this task
by going back to the Men’s page and timidly scrolling through the content in hopes to find a
section that matches the task description. When finished looking through the page, Joe proceeded
to go back to the same exact page he left off from the last task. While here, he searched through
each page looking at the names of boots, eventually coming across a boot with “Steel-Toe” in the
name. Going into the boot, he was able to find in the description information to confirm it is a
steel-toed boot. At this point, Joe wanted to quit. However, he went back to the previous page
and clicked on a few “work” typed boots to make sure no others were steel toe. Concluding the
task, he said there was only one boot that offered steel-toe construction.
Brittany started on the “work boot” section located in Women’s boots. From here, she
began the task by doing the same thing Joe attempted, which was looking in the “Shop All”. In
this area, she tried to use the “Sort By” dropdown, and then quickly realized that it would be no

16. help to her. The next tactic she attempted was to add each boot she had found in the previous
task and click on “Compare”. After doing so, Brittany was not able to find any that were steel-
toe constructed and continued to search for boots. As time passed, she became more frustrated
and eventually concluded that there were NO boot options available for her with steel-toe
construction.
Highlights
Problem #1: Probably the easiest problem to recognize when completing this task would be how
the testers were forced to click on every boot in order to see if steel-toe construction was offered.
For example, when the users were scrolling through the boots, there were no indications as to
which ones had steel-toe construction. Which forced them to go into the boot and find the boot
description are to see if there were the appropriate specs. Both users even attempted to use the
“Quick View” in order to find the information. Which resulted in just a slightly smaller version
of the next page. This was also a problem with loading time. The users commented on how it
took so long to load (pop-up). This problem directly related to my struggles during the test as
well, making both participants and myself susceptible to the issue(s).
Problem #2: The users came across a few problems that involved their ability to remember which
boots they had previously found. This was an issue because the testers found a certain amount of
boots under $140 and were not given any way to categorize or remember which exact boots these
were. When looking for the previous boots, Brittany was the tester who encountered the problem
the most. Aside from Joe, who found all of his boot options on one page, she had multiple pages

17. where she found boot options under $140. This concerns the problem more and is one of the
reasons why Brittany took longer on this task and giving the satisfaction rating a two.
Problem #3: One problem that occurred with the second tester may not be directly relate to the
task, yet she expressed her feelings about the issue. For example, when Brittany was going
through and comparing each boot, she found that every time clicking the “Compare” button, it
resulted in the website reloading and taking her back to the top of the page. This was more of an
annoyance because the fact she had to repetitively scroll back to find her last place.
Alignment to Heuristic: Recognition Rather than Recall
Recognition Rather than Recall is when “the user should not have to remember
information from one part of the dialogue to another.” Making the heuristic match several points
stated in the highlights. More specifically, problem #2 was an advocate of the issue. When the
testers switched from task one to task two, they were forgetful of which boots they had
previously chose and made it more difficult for them to complete the next task. There were no
options or resolutions given by the Muck Boot Company to help the users experience in this
area. Having a heuristic that so closely relates the major problem definitely shows that Muck
Boot Company should take action to prevent the problem from reoccurring.

18. Task 3: Assume/pretend that it is Tuesday at 3:30 p.m. and your flight leaves at 6:00 a.m.
Monday morning. Determine the cheapest shipping option to receive the boots on time, and
determine the associated costs.
Summary for Both Testers:
Tester 1:
Joe Suchan
Tester 2:
Brittany Hutchens Average
Average Satisfaction
(1=terrible, 5=excellent)
“3” (neutral) “5” (excellent) 4 / 5
When beginning this task with the testers and previous knowledge from when I
completed it myself, I had the assumption that my participants would have the same troubles;
however, that was not the case. The task proved to be simple for each tester to come up with a
solution in a descent amount of time. Beginning the test, Joe was located on the page with the
“Chore Hi Steel-Toe” boot when he began task 3. The first steps he took involved him inputting
information to the right of the boot preview. He followed by adding the boot to his bag and going
to the icon located on top right area of the website to “View Bag”. While in this area, he found
the “Estimate Tax and Shipping” dropdown menu to provide the information needed to help
complete the task. As he determined “UPS 3 Day $13.00” shipping was his best option, he also
had the idea of using the discount code provided in the pop-up from earlier. Concluding the task
with the answer of UPS 3 Day and a satisfaction rating at 3 out of 5.
The steps taken by Joe are very similar to what Brittany attempted. She began by doing
the exact same thing. Instead, she entered the area to “View Bag” and was attempting to go
through PayPal to find the information she was seeking. After realizing PayPal could not provide
her with the shipping information, she then proceeded with the same steps taken by Joe. In the

19. end, Brittany decided that “UPS 3 Day” was also the best option and even used the discount code
to support her answer as well. Resulting with her satisfaction rating of a 5 out of 5.
Highlights
Problem #1: Something important to consider when taking the usability test is how the website
obtains the information a user is seeking and fulfilling their needs. When going through this task,
both testers felt that it should have been easier to find the shipping information. Rather than
going to a completely new page, they would have wanted the information to be located on the
same page as the boot they were viewing.
Problem #2: Users were unsure how to find the associated costs when looking for the
information to complete the task. For example, when looking through the boots information to
the right of the preview, both users were hoping to see something that added tax costs and
shipping costs. Being such a large portion of the task, this area is important to think about how
difficult it proved to find and may consider revising.
Problem #3: The users found it difficult to navigate between their “Bag” and shopping area.
When going through the task, each tester wanted to go back to the previous page where the steel-
toe boot was located. Upon their confusion, they resorted to clicking on the boot image to take
them back. This was the only area located ON SITE that could take them back to where they
need.

20. Alignment to Heuristic: Flexibility and Efficiency of Use
When thinking about Flexibility an Efficiency of Use, you want something to
“accelerate” the user’s experience and make the site easier to use. I chose this heuristic because it
directly relates to problem #2 in the test highlights. When hoping to find the shipping and cost
information right away, both users became annoyed they had to go through more pages and a
longer process instead of directly being given what they needed. Having this heuristic put into
place could potentially keep more users on site and help them find what they need quicker. In
doing so, this would lead them towards buying more products.
Task 4: Choose the best boot option and determine the total order amount, including
shipping. (If this requires you to go through the steps to order, do so, but do not enter any
payment information, and of course, do not actually order the boots.)
Summary for Both Testers:
Tester 1:
Joe Suchan
Tester 2:
Brittany Hutchens Average
Average Satisfaction
(1=terrible, 5=excellent)
“4” (good) “4” (good) 4 / 5
The final task for the testers proved to be the easiest. Because each of the testers had
previously realized they could use the discount code to make the total order amount of boots
under $140, they knew where to start for this task. Both testers began the test by giving a last-
effort search for other steel-toe constructed boots. When finding nothing, they proceeded to go
back into their bag. When in the bag, the testers filled out their order information all the way up

21. until they were asked to enter a credit card and I proceeded to ask them to go no further. When
inputting the discount code and their personal information, they found the overall price of their
boots “Chore Hi Steel-Toe” to be $138.99 and would be shipped within three days. In doing so,
the testers would essential receiver their boots on Friday and be able to start helping the
hurricane victims the following Monday!
Highlights
Problem #1: Though there may not be too many problems involved with this task, something
miniscule that I found happening caused problems for the testers. Testers found it to be
confusing how the Muck Boot Company set up their payment and shipping information. We
already know that Brittany is an avid online shopper, and when doing the usability test I found
she always orders her products through PayPal or Amazon Prime. For example, when she went
to checkout her boots for the last time to complete this task, she again attempted to checkout
through PayPal. Yet the problem was that she could not use the discount code through PayPal
and the overall amount would be higher. In addition, less information regarding the boots
displayed through PayPal. Proving that Muck Boot Company prefers that users order through
their website, even if they offer alternatives. (See Figure 5)

22. Problem #2: Something interesting about the information received from the first tester in
completing task four was his reasoning why he thought the boots he picked were the best fit.
Task four was extremely short for him. Not even a minute passed by before he said “okay! I
guess I’m done”. When he said this, I followed up with the question, “why do you think these
boots are the best fit for you and the scenario?” With a content look on his face he said, “Well I
really don’t prefer these boots, or even think they are the best option, but they really are the
ONLY option.” Therefore, the problem was that users should be given more choices of boots
with steel-toe construction. Alternatively, stating somewhere if the affiliated companies owned
by Muck Boot had any boots to offer.
Problem #3: The first tester came across a problem when proceeding to checkout. He did not
realize there were multiple boots inside of his “Shopping Bag”, which made him confused when
configuring prices. Eventually he found his mistake and removed the boots from the bag.
However, having this problem occur means that the Muck Boot Company website did not make
it clear enough what the user might be paying for.
Alignment to Heuristic: User Control and Freedom
The heuristic closely relating the problems associated with the completion of task four is
“User Control and Freedom”. Jakob Nielsen explains the heuristic by saying, “Users often
choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked “emergency exit” to leave
the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue.” For example, having an
undo or redo button to help navigate easier could solve some of the problems. This heuristic

23. directly relates to this task because the struggles my testers went through in problem 1 and 3.
Both problems are different; however, using this heuristic could make navigation on both easier.
Final Site Thoughts
Concluding the usability test, I asked each tester one question, “How do you feel about
your shopping experience at MuckBootCompany.com?” Following this question, I also asked
what their overall site satisfaction would be. Each participant took a second the gather their
thoughts and commented as to how they felt. My first participant, Joe, gave his comment by only
saying one word, “annoyed”. The reason he was annoyed following the test was that the website
was not “direct” enough for him to navigate. Joe also stated how it proved to be so difficult to
search for specific products within the site; he recommended completely revising the search bar
and its functionality. To conclude his overall thoughts, he did not feel as satisfied as he did in the
beginning initial site thoughts.
4
3 3
4
4.5
3
2
5
4
2.5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Overall Satisfaction
Satisfaction(1-5)
Task Satisfaction & Overall Satisfaction
Overall Site Satisfaction
Tester 1: Joe Suchan Tester 2: Brittany Hutchens

24. Brittany related to his comments by saying the site was “rather difficult”. She explained
that compared to most websites she has used in the past, Muck Boot Company was probably the
most difficult. Concluding her statements, Brittany also left the website with a completely
different feeling than when she arrived. In her initial site thoughts, she assumed the website to be
credible and well put together, making a drastic change from then to now. This trend is apparent
in the task satisfaction charts. Apart from the navigation, she felt the site provided an
aesthetically pleasing look and continued her initial site thoughts with regard to that.
To look back on the testers initial site thoughts, both showed a great deal of similarities
even after completing the tasks. I stand corrected in presuming the testers would stray apart with
their struggles and opinions. For example, when Joe and Brittany attempted task 1, they found
similar struggles, yet Joe was able to conclude quicker and more easily than Brittany was able to.
This relates back to my statement how being a Computer Science major could potentially help
Joe in the task completion. With his previous knowledge on e-commerce websites, he was able
to realize what tools should be used first.
In the end, I believe both testers came out of the test with a more negative attitude toward
the website, rather when they first arrived. Even though the testers were frustrated following the
test, great information about the website was found in the process and can lead to web
designers/programmers working together to fix the problems.
Recommendations to Improve User Experience
Single Problem Being Fixed

25. Task 2, Problem #1: Users were unable to easily view information about the boots
without a continued due process.
Alignment to Heuristic: Flexibility and Efficiency of Use
Jakob Nielsen’s heuristic “Flexibility and Efficiency of Use” relates to this problem
because the testers found themselves wanting something to make their lives easier. For example,
as the user is searching for information and is unable to find that information unless X amount of
steps take place, then the user will become impatient and bounce from the site. When looking
back to this problem, the testers are looking for some type of accelerator to speed their process
up. To have both experienced and inexperienced users be able to use the website the same
prevents any future problems to happen, as well as creating ease-of-access for the user.

26. Problem Improvement
Before:
After:

27. As you can see in the Before > After diagram located on the previous page, I
implemented a rough draft as to how I think Muck Boot Company should layout their “Quick
View” pop-up.
Below is an image of the same “Quick View” wireframe I created to use for the before
and after diagram. (Figure 9) However, this version of the wireframe has letters placed
throughout various parts to use as a point of reference for when I discuss “why” I chose to
change those areas.
a) If you look at the reference wireframe, you can see the “a” is located in what is known
as the “Gallery” section. The previous pop-up were set up to have the images on left of the main
image and only display when clicked on. The reason why I chose to switch the formatting here

28. comes from the top tier in Jesse James’ chart “The Elements of User Experience”. While looking
at the chart of user experience, I found that implementing the correct “Visual Design” aspects to
the quick view would result in an overall better pop-up. Some aspects such as the gallery
“arrow” buttons, user interface between images, and the organization of the images play a role in
creating the best possible slideshow/gallery. Another reason why I chose this layout is because
the use of a slideshow. In my opinion, having a slideshow displaying different images of boots
can help the user get a better look at them. It also involves the user to notice what is happening,
because they will not always click on the other images, which is something the Muck Boot
Company has within their site right now.
b) When looking at “b” as a reference on the wireframe, you can see the title of the boot
would practically stay the same. However, just below the title is where the boot price is laid out,
unlike before, when the price was floating at a random spot on the page. I chose to place these
elements in the order and layout that I did, because it provides a clean separation between the
presented information. By doing this, I am allowing the user a clear view of what is associated
with the content in-between the lines.
The price also has a button to add the boots to their shopping cart. Again, there may be
more issues related to the content located in the shopping cart or shopping bag, but the sole
purpose of the button stays the same.
c) Just as “b” in the wireframe above, point “c” ties into having a clear design structure to
prevent users from getting confused as to what belongs where. Included in this portion of the

29. wireframe are stars representing ratings given by past customers. The reason why I chose this to
be a recommendation for the Muck Boot Company was that enabling this section with a visual
representation gives the users a good “first impression” on the boots they are looking at. The
current version also presents stars to the side. However, in the prototype I created, the user is
able to get this preview and even get the second option of writing a review at the bottom.
d) Using the same layout and for the same reasons, reference “d” is important to the
recommendations because it keeps the user active in the site, as well as directly tying into the
“Flexibility and Efficiency of Use” heuristic. The “Select a Size” and “Select a Color” menu
options give the user an idea as to how the following boxes should be used. By having the
interactive boxes included, the users are able to receive visuals as to what their product may be
like, apposed to just being provided a list of information. The Muck Boot Company had
something similar to this, but the difference between the two is the organization.
e) The area where one of the biggest changes and recommendations made on my part
includes the information present in the reference “e”. This area shows two categories, “Product
Information” and “Ratings and Reviews”. The area where this originally is shown is only located
in the full description page of the boots and presented problems in task two of the usability test.
Within this area, a description that shows details over the boots and the small icons are
representing the information that proved to be difficult to find in the test. Although this
recommendation relates with task two of the usability test, it also compares with the heuristic
“Recognition Rather than Recall”. With the implementation of the two heuristics, I believe this

30. “Quick View” pop-up could benefit potential users and most importantly the testers when going
through each task.
f) Located in the same section as reference point “e”, this area plays a huge role in both
recognition and flexibility of use. Also being part of the lower section added in the wireframe,
the information presented in “f” displays a list of potential shipping options. This area seemed to
cause the most conflict when my testers attempted the tasks in the usability test. Using the
information and output I received from them, I was able to determine the information should be
available in multiple sections of the website, including the “Quick View” pop-up. Aside from
being a list with shipping prices, the information has radio buttons that will add the cost of
shipping to the overall cost, giving the user a better estimate of their boot price. Having these
implementations in the “Quick View” will help create the best possible user experience on the
Muck Boot Company website.