I conducted a user experience (UX) study, as part of an evaluation process for a paper submission to ICADL 2012 –the paper was accepted–, towards the end of July 2012. I particularly found AllAboutUX.org useful for selecting the UX evaluation methodology to utilise, and eventually resorted to using Intrinsic Motivation Inventory.
The study was aimed at evaluating the user experience on the ease of completing tasks and corresponding pleasure or displeasure from interacting with the tool.
The evaluation method I used is Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI), and I settled for it by specifying items matrix in the table below on AllAboutUX.org. IMI is essentially described as a muti-dimensional measurement device used to elicit participants’ subjective experience to an activity in experiments. It is mostly used in experiments related to intrinsic motivation.
I only used three (3) –Interest/Enjoyment, Value/Usefulness and Perceived Competence– subscales from the prescribed seven (7) subscales. I then appropriated one of the recommended post-experimental Intrinsic Motivation Inventory questionnaire by only considering items relevant to the study.[table “8” not found /]
The target group was novice digital library software users –individuals with little or no experience using dl tools– and so I decided to get my sampling pool from social networking sites. I posted adverts on Facebook, Google Plus and Twitter.
The recruited subjects were required to perform the tasks below, and were in return given R30.00 (~ $3.50) worth of airtime after successfully completing all the tasks 🙂
- Task #1: watch youtube quick start video (it’s still up on my Youtube channel)
- Task #2: download two datasets
- Task #3: perform a series of tasks on the software using the downloaded datasets
- Task #4: fill out an IMI questionnaire, rated on a likert scale of 1 (Strongly Agree) to 5 (Strongly Disagree)
There were 77 respondents, but only 29.87% successfully performed all the tasks. The IMI computation procedure was utilised, by averaging the individual IMI subscale items, and the results, as shown in the plot below, suggest that the majority of users found the tool easy to use and very useful. The results from the Interest/Enjoyment subscale of the other hand could be attributed to the fact that that majority of users may not have been fully aware of the fact that the module is a small piece of the puzzle –the complete system is composed of an end user interface, a curator module, and a repository sub-layer.