Results

User Testing Observations and Suggested Changes

After completing 5 user testing interviews using prompts developed for different user personas (see Usability Testing) the following observations were recorded in response to the research questions.

Tested users included 4 researchers (2 oral history focused and 2 general collections) and 1 general public member.

GENERAL USE

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

• Can users find the Digital Collections Policy page?

• Is it easy/intuitive for users to find the About and/or FAQ page?

• Can users find information about the rights associated with digital objects and how they can contact us to ask more questions?

• How useful is the information provided on the rights page?

OBSERVATIONS:

None of the tested users located the FAQ, About, or Contact page. When looking for help, all users scrolled to the bottom of the page.

All users except one were able to locate the copyright information for a record. Of those who were able to locate the copyright information, all clicked on the link, read, and understood the page detailing the terms of the copyright.

SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:

1. Remove FAQ, About, and Contact Page from the header menu. Create a new footer menu at the bottom of the page to add these links.

SEARCHING

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

• Do users understand/use our facets?

• Would an advanced search be useful to users?

• Are users able to find what they need?

OBSERVATIONS:

All scholarly users used the “Limit your search” menu to refine their search. These users also referred to the subject and creator headings listed in the search results to assess their findings. The public user did not feel compelled to look at the refinement menu.

One user opened the subject heading list for their search results. She promptly gave up as there were too many headings to click through them all.

Users were unable to distinguish between the collection search and the site search, and there was general confusion around whether one was searching in a specific department or in the entire digital collection. It was difficult for users to understand how to search within their results.

Users spend much more time looking through search results than on the record pages to compare their results. When a researcher finds an interesting record, they open it in a new tab to come back to later so that they can examine all of their results at once.

SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:

1. Make facet lists easier to browse by adding a “jump to letter” option to pop up.

2. Move the collections search bar to a new location on the page, possibly above the collection description.

3. Make records open in a new tab, or consider the cart feature.

ORAL HISTORY

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

• Are users able to use OHMS?

• Can users find the oral history collection?

• Is the email form sufficient? Can folks download?

OBSERVATIONS:

Only one user used the OHMS search tool but she was confused by it – she would type in her keyword, then click the Jump to Text button instead of the Search button. Other users did not notice the option. One guessed that she didn’t recognize it as something useful because there was no other content on that side of the page. Jump to text didn’t do anything when on the TOC tab, which really confused her.

No users noticed that audio files were available upon request for a restricted oral history until it was pointed out to them.

Users were universally concerned and confused by the OH request form. They expressed that in a real-world scenario, they would be wary of filling out the form without more explanation as to what using the interview might entail. They wouldn’t assume it would be easy to use for research due to its restricted nature, so they would avoid requesting it unless absolutely necessary.

Users browsing the table of contents would open different interview sections when searching for desired content. Only one section is able to be opened at one time, so users would then have trouble going back to previously opened sections.

SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:

1. Move the OHMS search tool to a more noticeable location. Do research on the traditional OHMS interface to see where the search is located and perhaps copy this.

2. Edit request audio files button text.

3. Write clearer information about the terms of restricted interview use.

4. Allow multiple TOC sections to be open at once.

Survey Results

Key takeaways:

1. We attract an older audience: The majority of users are at or above retirement age. 62% of users reported being above 45 years old. The remaining 40% of users are spread evenly in age between “under 18” and 45 years of age.

2. The majority of our users come to us from their Google or online search engine searches and are first-time users.

3. Our users are highly educated. 75% are college educated, and 50% have an advanced degree.

4. The majority of our users are entering our site out of personal motivation or general curiosity. Only 28% of users are coming to the site for professional or scholarly purposes.

NOTES:

We do attract kids and young adults! While this group only amounts to approximately 17% of users, this is a group to focus on growing.

25% of our users have a high school, trade school, or “other” degree as their highest education level. Our descriptive language should be inclusive of all levels of education.

Reported motivations for entering the site include looking for classroom supplements/teaching aids, information on a specific scientist or a specific object, information on a general topic, for genealogy research or nostalgia, or to fulfill general curiosity. The majority of users find our site due to their research on a general topic.

Many users were seeking images, whether for research, classroom use, or publication. Describing these works to make them easy to find is imperative. We should prioritize the digitization of image-heavy and visual materials.

We also have several users for whom English is not their primary language. Our site should be friendly to non-native or non-fluent English speakers.