Low impact, low cost web usability testing

Over the last few months I’ve run across links to a few tools that help designers perform quick and dirty usability testing, sometimes on live sites with actual users.

WebWorkerDaily has an article about Clixpy. And another tool I found recently is Loop11. I haven’t had the chance to test either of them recently, but I’m filing them away for future reference.

Also, I found an interesting article at A List Apart about the Myth of Usability Testing:

First, usability testing has high shock value. Teams invariably conclude their initial sessions surprised to learn they had not noticed glaringly obvious design problems.

[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][W]hile testing alone is not a good indicator of where a team’s priorities should lie, it is most certainly part of the triangulation process. When put in context of other data, such as project goals, user goals, user feedback, and usage metrics, testing helps establish a complete picture. Without this context, however, testing can be misleading or misunderstood at best, and outright damaging at worst.

When using any of these methods, it’s important to try to find participants who actually want to complete the very tasks you wish to evaluate.

Hoekman Jr., R. (2009, October 20). The Myth of Usability Testing. Retrieved November 11, 2009 from A List Apart Website: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/the-myth-of-usability-testing/

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]