TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Docs DO NOT have to be done to test them! From:"Usability Expertise Center ph.603.881.2430" <raven -at- USABLE -dot- ENET -dot- DEC -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 11 Aug 1994 09:21:03 EDT
Hi,
Regarding the reasons for not usability testing documentation:
all are certainly valid in many cases, but we don't have to live with
it that way! In my company we use 2 types of tests of the Documents
alone--without the software--that DO help test the usability.
They are:
1. Summary Test
2. Read-and-Locate test
I'll explain each briefly in a moment. First, yea, testing the
software and the documentation together is the idea thing. But there
is a lot we can test about the usabilty of a document (Either online
or hardcopy or both) without the software--like, is the organization
of the book logical from the user persepctive? Is the index usable? Is
information "findable"?
At Digital, we advocate documentation usability evaluations
throughout the development process--we also like to say that usability
testing is scalable--you can begin by testing just one margin
icon--some testing of some parts are better than no testing.
These tests were developed by a team of people, primariily Minette
Beabes, who is still with Digital, Tara Scanlon, Now of Dun and
Bradstreet Software, and Me.
Now, a bit about each method:
Summary tests ask users to read short sections of conceptual
information and then summarize it effectively or answer questions
about it correctly. It's like a reading comprehension test, but it's
the book, not the participant, that is being tested. This test helps
to evaluate the comprehemsibility of information. We usually ask a set
of questions about the reading after the participant has read it, and
see how many the person gets right and gets wrong. Then, for the ones
they get wrong,we talk about why they did not fully understand the
text and what we might be able to do to revise it.
Read and Locate Test asks participants to read questions and find the
answers in the document (and we have used hardcopy and online
documents). This method focuses on the retrievability and
comprehensibility of information. For example, it measures the
effectiveness of navigational cues such as index entries and headings.
FOR MORE INFORMATION: see
Raven, Mary Elizabeth. "Quick Usability Tests for Documentation:
Read/Locate and Summary Tests." Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE
INternational Professional COmmunication Conference held in Santa Fe.
New York: IEEE (1992):254-257.
Raven, Mary Elizabeth. "Comparative Read-and-Locate tests: ONline and
Hardcopy." Proceedings of the 1992 Society for technical Communication
Annual Conference. Washinton, D.C. Society for Technical
Communication. 1992. 341-344.
Enjoy!
Mary Beth Raven
Digital Equipment Corporation
Raven -at- usable -dot- enet -dot- dec -dot- com
