Over the past few months, we’ve conducted several studies with different versions of the seven-point Single Ease Question (SEQ®), a popular task-level metric for perceived ease-of-use. As we’ve seen with other research on rating scales, response means tend to be rather stable despite often salient changes to formatting. In our earlier SEQ research, we found
We use the seven-point Single Ease Question (SEQ®) frequently in our practice, as do many other UX researchers. One reason for its popularity is the body of research that started in the mid-2000s with the comparison of the SEQ to other similar short measures of perceived ease-of-use, the generation of a normative SEQ database, and
The seven-point Single Ease Question (SEQ®) has become a standard in assessing post-task perceptions of ease. Since the SEQ’s inception, we have collected data from thousands of task experiences to generate a normalized database of scores. We have also established its strong correlation to task completion and task time. Over the years, some researchers have
When quantifying the user experience of a product, app, or experience, we recommend using a mix of study-level and task-based UX metrics. While it’s not always feasible to assess a task experience (because of challenges with budgets, timelines, or access to products and users), observing participants attempt tasks can help uncover usability problems, informing designers
In Quantifying the User Experience, we recommend using a mix of task-level and study-level metrics, especially in benchmarking studies. But what, exactly, are task-level and study-level metrics, how do they differ, and why should you collect them both? In this article, we’ll explore this common practice of collecting both types of metrics to understand the
Task completion is one of the fundamental usability metrics. It’s the most common way to quantify the effectiveness of an interface. If users can’t do what they intend to accomplish, not much else matters. While that may seem like a straightforward concept, actually determining whether users are completing a task often isn’t as easy. The
One of the fundamental principles behind usability testing is to let the participants actually use the software, app, or website and see what problems might emerge. By simulating use and not interrupting participants, you can detect and fix problems before users encounter them, get frustrated, and stop using and recommending your product. So while there’s
Did you do that task correctly? Unmoderated testing provides many benefits. The most notable of which is the ability to collect metrics from a large and geographically diverse sample of participants quickly. A common metric collected in usability tests is the task completion rate. It’s often called the fundamental usability metric because if users can’t complete
It’s often called web surfing or web browsing, but it probably should be called web doing. While there is still plenty of time to kill using the web, in large part, we’re all trying to get things done. Purchasing, reserving, comparing and communicating—Internet behavior is largely a goal directed activity. If a website doesn’t help
Completion rates are the fundamental usability metric: A binary measure of pass and fail (coded as 1 or 0) provides a simple metric of success. If users cannot complete a task, not much else matters with respect to usability or utility. Easy to understand: They are easy to collect and easy to understand for both
