Table of Contents
Overview
...
The session focused on the repository page generally and the five categories displayed on the repository page specifically: Collections, Records, Subjects, People and Organizations, and Record Groups. It probed the questions question of whether these were the most appropriate categories to meet user needs on this page and if they were labeled in a way that would provide users with a clear sense of their meaning. Participants were provided with a paper-based version of the repository page to enhance focus on the page itself and guided with semi-structured interview questions through it. At the time of the test the page provided to participants appeared in the following form:
...
The sessions were designed as guided semi-structured interviews and lasted between 15 and 20 minutes on average. Interviews were transcribed and the data analyzed with key themes noted as an overlay on the existing repository page. Based on the results of this work, a paper prototype was designed to address the areas of concern. This prototype was shared with a different group of archival and library professionals, as well as student library workers in an informally arranged A/B test. Based on this work, a redesigned repository page mock-up is offered for consideration.
Findings and Recommendations
...
Participants all, at one point or another, indicated that the contact information was either misplaced or not really helpful. More than contact information, what participants wanted was a way to get help or find out more. The address was useful only, some added, for planning a visit, which was not necessarily a first step and in that case, they would have preferred to have a map or directions, not just a static address.
...
Though it was not explicitly raised as a point of confusion for these participants, the term "repository," may have contributed to their sense that they didn't really know what this header meant or what it would allow them to do ("Repositories - how are they different from collections?" asked one participant). "I guess this is a browse area?" wondered several participants who further elaborated that they weren't sure if it was for the specific repository listed in the header above or for the whole site.
...
While it is possible that the participants were perplexed by the specific numbers, being generally smaller (or, as in the case of records, larger) than one might expect, they were a distraction for all participants in the study. In particular the mismatch between the number of collections and the number of records (. "whatWhat's going on there?" )asked a participant pointing to the thousands of records as compared to the double-digit collections.
Collections
This category made immediately seemed to make immediate sense to participants and they offered appropriate definitions for the kinds of things they would expect to find in this category.
...
In line with previous user testing, participants found the number of subjects presented to be troublesome and perhaps an indication of an error. They would want, they indicated, more subjects. Several participants also indicated that this would be the first area that they would be likely to click to explore, although the small number of subjects was a deterrent. This points to the utility of having subject access, but also the necessity for it to be a functional and user-supporting feature.
People and Organizations
A majority of participants expressed confusion with the “People & Organizations” option. Most participants initially thought that it would be a list of library staff or of project partners in ArchivesSpace. One participant found this comforting as it would be a way to talk to a real person for help if any issues arose. One participant understood that People & Organizations related to the collections, but expressed uncertainty about exactly what that relationship was.
...
Develop new terminology for the problematic "People and Organizations." "Content Creators" did well among participants polled informally after testing. This label allows for a group of people icon (as below) which can stand for people and organizations.
Consider whether the subject browse is really ready to implement. Repositories may not have the metadata to back up this feature.
Search Repository
Suggestions
Simplify search on the main page and offer an advanced search option.
Provide more flexibility and clarity for date filtering.
Other
Suggestions
Implement the previously suggested link to a form or other for questions, a map/directions, a policy page, and link to the repository's webpage for other/more information.
Terminology and design that make the site feel specialized and the processes opaque for users seem consistently resonate through user testing. Suggestions made in previous user studies may help mediate these feelings for users.
First prototype
Based on this feedback in user testing, the following prototype was developed:
...
Suggested Layout Redesign
Submitted by Emilie Hardman, November 7, 2016