To: Students in Psychology 384, Research Methods in Human Factors

From: Susan Brennan and Tony Weaver

Date: Thursday, Feb. 26, 2009

Re: Assignment #4, Screen Design (due Thursday, March 5, 2009)

Many popular web sites are too cluttered or have distracting elements. Some are maddening to navigate, perhaps lacking desirable links, forcing the user to scroll down to find commonly used links or buttons, or suggesting that something is a link when it isn’t. Some have cryptic labels or icons. Often, designers simply take a print document and place it on the web, resulting in a page that is too wordy. Sometimes text is unreadable, images are unclear, or one thing occludes another.

For this assignment, you will choose a web site whose design you find problematic, critique it, and re-design one of the screens from this web site. (Note: Choose a web site to redesign that is different from the examples Jakob Nielsen uses for his analyses.)

Warmup: Visit Jakob Nielsen’s web site, http://www.useit.com/, and read “Original Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design” (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605a.html). Follow some of the links at the bottom that continue that topic (e.g., “Web Design Mistakes”). Check out http://www.useit.com/homepageusability/studyguide.html.

In two pages (1-1/2-spaced), describe what is wrong with the site you have chosen. Briefly discuss any of these issues that are relevant to that web site:

1. Organization and information design: Is the site well-organized and comprehensible? Is it clear from the home page what the site is for? Once you get into the site, how is the layout - are things that belong together located in a sensible way? Does the layout seem likely to cause any interaction errors? Does the site’s structure seem too broad or too deep or just right?
2. Navigation: Is it easy for you to find your way around? Is it clear what you’re supposed to click on? Do the links go where you expect them to? Do the links all work? Do you end up in any dead ends?
3. Functionality: Does the site accomplish its goals? If the site allows for transactions (e.g., purchasing something, signing a petition, etc.), does the site give you the information you need, when you need it? And do you get evidence that the transaction was successful? Can things be undone?
4. Clarity: Are the site’s goals and capabilities clear? Is the information concise? How can you find out more information about an aspect of the site? If you experience a problem that requires contacting the web site’s owner, is there easy-to-find contact information?
5. Initiative: Does the system take any initiative, and does this seem appropriate to you? Does the site use any particular techniques to get your attention or persuade you, and are these appropriate?
6. Metaphor: Is there an identifiable metaphor for the system’s design? (Or more than one?) Do you find the metaphor(s) appropriate? (Why or why not?)
7. Customizability: Does the site tailor itself or remember previous information for you (such as in forms)?
8. Accessibility: Does the site load quickly and easily? Do you think it would be accessible for someone using a screen reader? (See Nielsen’s site for more.)

Then, in the third (final) page of your memo, discuss how you might redesign one of the site’s screens. Choose one representative screen from the badly designed web site, and print a copy of it (this will be Figure 1 and should go after your 3 pages as an Appendix). Number any of the elements on it that you want to refer to, and refer to them by number. Then create a new image (Figure 2) that illustrates how you would re-do this page. Figure 2 need not be an artistic masterpiece—it can be hand-drawn or done using a drawing program or collaged (cut-and-pasted) from elements printed out from other web sites if you like. Just make sure that Figure 2 clearly conveys your suggestions for changes. The third page of your memo should include a brief discussion of the numbered elements that you suggest changing. We will discuss your re-designs in lab.