An Introduction to Treejack

1 / 48

# An Introduction to Treejack - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

An Introduction to Treejack. Out on a limb with your IA. Dave O ’ Brien Optimal Usability. Dave O ’ Brien Optimal Usability Wellington, New Zealand. Welcome. 22 Jan 2010 36 attendees USA, CA, UK, NZ, AU, BR, CO. Quickie Treejack tour What is tree testing? Planning a tree test

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' An Introduction to Treejack' - hanley

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### An Introduction to Treejack

Out on a limb with your IA

Dave O’Brien

Optimal Usability

Dave O’BrienOptimal Usability

Wellington, New Zealand

Welcome

22 Jan 2010

36 attendees

USA, CA, UK, NZ, AU, BR, CO

Quickie Treejack tour

What is tree testing?

Planning a tree test

Setting up Treejack

Running a test

High-level results

Detailed results

Lessons learned

(Q&A throughout)

Agenda
Poll
• Have you used Treejack yet?
• No, haven’t tried it yet = 20%
• Yes, but only a practice test = 60%
• Yes, have run a "real" test = 20%
Tree testing - the 5-minute tour
• Creating a medium or large website
• Does your top-down structure make sense?

Can users find particular items in the tree?

Can they find them directly, without having to backtrack?

Could they choose between topics quickly, without having to think too much?

Which parts of your tree work well?

Which fall down?

What’s it good for?

Comparing structures (before/after, or A vs. B)

Isolating the structure itself

Getting user data early (before site is built)

Making it cheap & quick to try out ideas

What it’s NOT

NOT testing page layout

NOT testing visual design

NOT a substitute for full user testing

NOT a replacement for card sorting

Origin

Paper tree testing

“card-based classification”– Donna Spencer

Show lists of topics on index cards

In person, score manually, analyse in Excel

Make it faster & easier

Create a web tool for remote testing

Quick for a designer to learn and use

Simple for participants to do the test

Able to handle a large sample of users

Able to present clear results

Quick turnaround for iterating

But I already do card sorting!

Open card sorting is generative

Suggests how your users mentally group content

Helps you create new structures

Closed card sorting – almost not quite

Tree testing is evaluative

Tests a given site structure

Shows you where the structure is strong & weak

Lets you compare alternative structures

A useful IA approach

Run a baseline tree test (existing structure)

What works? What doesn’t?

Run an open card sort on the content

How do your users classify things?

Come up with some new structures

Run tree tests on them (same tasks)

Compare to each other

Compare to the baseline results

Stakeholder interview

Find out who, what, when, etc.

fill in "planning questions" template

Get the tree(s) in digital format

use Excel tree-import template, etc.

Planning a tree test
Getting the tree

Import a digital format

Excel

Text file

Word

Or enter in Treejack

Poll

Small (less than 50 items) = 25%

Medium (50 - 150 items) = 39%

Large (150 - 250 items) = 22%

Huge (more than 250 items) = 14%

Tree tips

Recommend <1000 items

Bigger? Cut it down by:

Using top N levels (e.g. 3 or 4)

Testing subtrees separately*

Pruning branches that are unlikely to be visited

Remove “helper” topics

Watch for implicit topics!

Implicit topics

Create your tree based on the content, not just the page structure.

• Home
• Products
• Support
• South America
• Europe

• North America
• Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet,
• sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt
• ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

South America

• Home
• Products
• Support
• North America
• South America
• Europe

Europe

• Draft representative tasks for each group
• Tasks must be “real” for those users!
• Beware the learning effect
• Small tree ~8, large tree ~12
• More tasks? Limit per participant
• What parts of the tree do you want to test?
• Coverage should reflect importance
• Be specific
• Be clearly worded
• Use the customer’s language
• Be concise
• Beware “give-away” words!
• Review now, preview before the real test
Creating a Treejack project

Less on mechanics, more on tips

Setting up a Treejack project
Creating a project

New vs. Duplicate

Identification

The “Other” option

Passing an argument in the URLhttps://demo.optimalworkshop.com/treejack/survey/test1?i=12345

Paste from Excel, Word, text file, etc.

“Top”– how to replace

Randomising

Not the same as randomising tasks

Changing the tree after entering answers

Lesson learned:

Edit/review/finalise the tree elsewhere before putting it into Treejack

Preview is surprisingly useful

The “main” answer is usually not enough

Check the entire tree yourself

Must choose bottom-level topics

Workaround: Mark all subtopics correct

Workaround: Remove the subtopics

20-30 tasks = 10 per participant

Increase the # of participants to get enough results per task

Skip limit

Eliminate users who didn’t really try

Defaults to 50%

Testing the test

Not previewing/piloting is just plain dumb

Spot mistakes before launch

Preview the entire test yourself

Pilot it with stakeholders and sample users

Launch it, get feedback, duplicate, revise

Look for:

Misc. problems (e.g. instructions)

How many participants do you get per test?

1 – 20 = 44%

21 – 40 = 20%

41 – 100 = 24%

Over 100 = 12%

Poll
Running the tree test

Invite participants

Website-page invitations

email invitations

Recommend >30 users per user group/test

Monitor early results for problems

low # of surveys started

Email invitation not clear? Subject = spam? Not engaging?

low completion rate

email didn’t set expectations? Test too long? Too hard?

Generally less taxing than card sorting

10/100/1000 level of detail

Middling overall score

Often many highs with a few lows

Inspect tasks with low scores (low total or low sub-scores)

Inspect the pie charts

Skimming high-level results
Success

% who chose a correct answer(directly or indirectly)

low Success score

check the spreadsheet to see where they went wrong

Destinations tab

Path tab

Directness

% of successful users who did not backtrack

Coming soon: making this independent of success

low Directness score

check the spreadsheet for patterns in their wandering

Paths tab

Speed

70% Speed score

7/10 users went their “normal” speed

3/10 users took substantially longer than normal for them

Low Speed score

indicates that user hesitated when making choices

e.g. choices are not clear or not mutually distinguishable

Wish: add the raw times to the spreadsheet, so you can do your own crunching as needed.

Overall score uses a grid to combine these scores in a semi-intelligent fashion

Where did people end up?

# who chose a given topic as the answer

High totals - problem with that topic (perhaps in relation to its siblings)

Clusters of totals – problem with the parent level

Ignore outliers

For >30 sessions, ignore topics that get <3 clicks.

Detailed results – destinations
Detailed results – destinations

Look for high “indirect success” rates (>20%)

Check paths for patterns of wandering

Look for high “failure” rates (>25%)

Look for high skip rates (> 10%)

Check paths for where they bailed out.

Look for "evil attractors"

Topics that get clicks across several seemingly unrelated tasks.

Usually a vague term that needs tightening up

Where they went on their first click

Which sections they visited overall

Did they visit the right section but back out?

Detailed results – first clicks
Click-by-click paths that they took through the tree

How the heck did they get way over there?

Did a lot of them take the same detour?

No web UI for removing participants.

Email Support and we’ll fix you up.

Detailed results – paths
Some lessons learned
• Test new against old
• Revise and test again – quick cycles
• Test a few alternatives at the same time
• Cover the sections according to their importance
• Analysis is easier than for card sorting
• Use in-person testing to get the “why”
• Paper is still effective (and free!) for this
• Tree testing is only part of your IA work
What’s coming

Better scoring for Directness, Speed

Improved results (10/100/1000)

General enhancements across Treejack, OptimalSort, and Chalkmark

Whatever you yell loudest for…

GetSatisfaction lets you “vote” for issues

Boxes & Arrows article on tree testinghttp://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/tree-testing

Donna Spencer’s article on paper tree testinghttp://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/card_based_classification_evaluation

Treejack websiteWebinars, slides, articles, user forumhttp://www.optimalworkshop.com

Tree testing – more resources