REDCOM Usability  Testing

Helping college students to collect the express packages faster and more easily.

Helping college students to collect the express packages faster and more easily.

My Role

Team Leader

Researcher

Timeline

4 months

Project Type

Team project

Tools Used

Heuristics Evaluation

Usability Testing

Project Overview

Our primary goal was to conduct a usability testing on the REDCOM Conference Manager to evaluate the tool for its learnability, cognitive load, and efficiency of use. 

REDCOM Conference Manager is a secured web-based application with an accessible graphic user interface that enables the organization to manage, control and monitor audio conferences.

Project Process

process.png

Objectives of the evaluation

The objective of this usability testing is to gather practical instances of the effectiveness and efficiency of the system.

The goals of this study are:

●      Collecting users’ opinion on the strengths and weakness of the system

●      Identifying obstacles that interfere with managing the conference and the members

●      Providing recommendations to enhance its usability and enable faster task operations.

Research Questions

To address the goals of the study, we have gathered data about the following research questions.

  • Can the participants add members to the conference efficiently?

    • Can the participants efficiently add members to the conference?

    • Does the participant receive appropriate feedback while dialing numbers?

    • Is the participant trying to find faster ways of adding members?

 

  • Can the participants edit the members efficiently?

    • Can the participants edit member details efficiently?

    • Can the participant understand the distinction between the status icons “loudest member” and “talking members” ?

    • Is the participant able to distinguish “Mute”  as button among the other status icons?

 

  • Can the participants edit the conference efficiently?

    • Can the participants understand the meaning and the explanation of the term “Squelch”?

    • Is it easier for the participant to create a sub-conference?

    • Is dropping a member from the conference intuitive?

    • Is ending a conference intuitive to the participant?

Evaluation Environment

image14.png

The usability testing was conducted in the Usability Lab at RIT on a desktop computer in the lab.

We had 2 observers in the observation room and 2 moderators in the test room.

  • Moderator 1 was responsible for guiding the participant throughout the tests.

  • Moderator 2 was responsible for setting up the entry criteria for each task.

  • Observers were responsible for setting up the devices for the task and recording the tests.

Participants 

For the evaluation 9 participants were recruited in total, 1 for the pilot test and 8 for the regular test. And among the 8 regular participants:

  • 2 were graduate students from Networks & System Administration,

  • 3 were graduate students from Telecommunication Engineering,

  • 3 were undergraduate students from Computing Information Technologies.

The participants were recruited through emails and posters, which were pinned up to the notice boards on the telecommunication department and cafes on the campus. The interested individuals were expected to fill up a screening questionnaire for the team to validate their eligibility criteria.

participant profiles.jpg

Tasks and Scenarios

To map and organize the information, I then bucketed the design requirements as feature components on the flow diagram to form the backbone of the app.

1
1

2
2

6.2
6.2

1
1

1/7

Test Design

We conducted the test on a single participant group. All the participants operated REDCOM Conference Manager version 2.13 and performed the same set of tasks. A quick training was given to the participants to provide them an overview of the system and its purpose.

  • Number of participants: 8 regular participants (1 pilot test participant)

  • Test design: 1 Product – 1 Group – 1 Set of Tasks

Group 2.png

Timing

The evaluation took around 25-40 minutes per participant, which included signing the Informed Consent (see Appendix 7.2), filling up of background questionnaire (see Appendix 7.3), basic training, tasks and post-test questionnaires. The tasks and their approximate time frames are enlisted below -

Procedure.png

Testing Findings

More details about the study cannot be made publicly available because this project is under NDA. For more information, please contact me!