|
|
Independent Practitioner/Fall 2005 |
||
|
Technology Updates |
Usability Review: Division 42 Website, Members Section David Palmiter |
||
|
Gordon Herz, Division 42’s Internet Editor, asked me to do usability study on the division’s website. He and I agreed that I would split this into two studies: one regarding the side for members and one regarding the side for nonmembers. This article represents the study of the member’s side. If you haven’t visited it yet I’d suggest doing so before reading this article. Go to www.division42.org and click on the “members area” icon on the upper left side. If you’ve never logged on before you’ll need your APA member number. I asked three independent, licensed, doctoral-level psychologist-practitioners to use the site while I quietly sat behind them taking notes. I asked each of them to imagine they had just learned of a website designed to support psychologists who practice independently and that they decided to go to the site to check it out (none of the three had been to the website before). I asked them to first imagine what goals they would have as they approached the site. I then suggested that they use the site as they would were I not in the room. The only thing I asked them to do differently was to talk out loud as much as possible as they used the site. At the end, I gave them a brief questionnaire to complete. The first psychologist was a 52 year-old woman who has been licensed for 27 years; she is in full time private practice and has been practicing independently for 14 years. I’ll call her Janet. The second psychologist was a 45-year old woman who has been licensed for seven years and working in her private practice for seven years. I’ll call her Mary. The third user was a 38-year old newly licensed psychologist who had just opened a part-time private practice. I’ll call him Craig. Below I’ll review their comments and add my own in italics. I’ll then review the searchability of the site and make some suggestions. All three users expressed a sense of confusion regarding the layout of the home page (by home page I mean the “members only” section). Mary remarked, “I hate scrolling on the home page” and Craig stated, “all of this is too much for me. I’ll get distracted; the menu is huge.” A sense of being overwhelmed by the organization of the site seemed to permeate each of their visits. All three users indicated, as they worked their way through the site, that they did not know where they were within the site and they did not know how to get back to where they had been. Hence, their principle method of navigation was to use the back button. Janet offered the following suggestion: “it would help if each page looked the same or offered the same links back to central locations.” [Issues regarding the organization of the site were the users #1 concern. They made additional comments along these lines. For instance they all indicated they were unsure if they had seen everything on the site by the time they were finished. Also, that some material was located on more than one page within the site seemed to further heighten their sense of disorientation. I’ll make a few suggestions for tweaking the organization of the site at the end.] The two women both indicated that their top agenda in approaching the site was continuing education. Janet said she was looking for workshops that she could attend. She noted the online offering but said such did not interest her as she prefers “more of an interpersonal connection.” Mary didn’t comment on the online offering but noted that she was looking for a list of trainings and workshops to be offered at the upcoming annual meeting of APA. When she did not find this she complained [Mary never found the “meetings” section embedded more deeply within the site. Anyway, given these two users’ experience, I wonder if there might there be a way to link to continuing education opportunities for psychologists through APA.] Mary next clicked in the FAQ link on the right side; she objected when learning that the questions here only pertain to the division’s listserv. The other users also clicked on the FAQ link at different junctures and expressed the same thoughts as Mary. It seems like they were expecting a list of FAQs for the entire site–it also seemed like they were hoping such FAQs would aide in their navigation. For instance, the first thing Craig clicked on was the FAQ link as he was looking for materials pertaining to health insurance coverage. [I would either develop a traditional FAQ section or list the link as “listserv questions”. If one had the time–and who does–one might develop a list of FAQs that practitioners pose with links to the relevant articles in the Independent Practitioner.] Both Craig and Janet went to the “Practice Development” section second; Mary visited this section midway through her visit. Craig said, “All they have on practice development is these brochures? I was looking for more than that.” Despite Craig’s initial reaction he, and the other two users as well, expressed immediate liking for the fact that press releases are available for use. However, Janet was turned off by her review of the terrorism press release because “…it was probably written shortly after 9/11 and not updated for recent events.” Janet made similar remarks about other material she found throughout the website noting: “for me articles on the internet should be taken down after they are a few years old, otherwise they become outdated and passé.” However, she went back later in her visit and noted that there were materials there she would probably download for her patients. Craig remarked that he liked the section on anxiety disorders in children. However, he lamented that there were no press releases available regarding assessment and educational issues. [His practice has an assessment focus.] Mary liked the articles on adultery and parenting toddlers; however, she complained: “How I can use these? What’s the copyright? It’s vague along those lines…can I download these and put my name on them?” Mary and Craig both liked the brochure section. However, Craig noted that he had hoped to get some tips on how to write and create a brochure as he is trying to market his practice. Mary was the only one to scan the content of the brochures. She said that she liked the shyness brochure “a lot” and thought the other one could be useful if left in the offices of those who might refer. She liked the brochures enough to check out the ordering information. When she went to that page she said, “freaking expensive!” [For what it’s worth, I believe they are fairly priced.] Janet’s only remark was to note that she believed that the people who could most benefit from the brochure “Choosing a Psychologist” probably would not visit this page. At this point the users took different paths through the website. When visiting the “Products and Services” section Craig said, “this is not what I want. I was hoping to get information on how to get insurances to cover assessments.” He indicated that this was his primary goal in visiting the site. Mary remarked that she was surprised to see the shyness brochure listed here too, and thought that maybe it was a different offering. All three users very much liked the articles found within previous editions of the Independent Practitioner. This was, by far, the users most valued and favorite part of the website. They spent the most time reviewing these articles and when they talked about wanting to come back later it was usually in reference to these articles. Humorous articles and those pertaining to managed care, the internet and HIPAA seemed to catch their attention the most. Janet noted that she would want to come back and copy some of the articles to leave in her waiting room. Mary remarked that this offering, by itself, makes division dues worthwhile; to that end, she suggested prominently featuring information on how to join the division. Only Janet clicked on the “Committees and Task Forces” section. She said, “This turns me off as it’s 2004 committees that aren’t even active now. She next went to the “Special Interests” section and made the same comment, noting that it was last updated three years ago and that several of the links no longer work. For the rest of her visit Janet focused on aspects of the site that she believed were outdated; she also remarked that she did not understand why there was a “Classified Ads” section with no adds in it. Craig was the only user to go to two other places on the website. He went to the directory; he said he liked the idea of it. He started filling it out the form to join but noted that he did not know his APA number. He also said he wished there was more diversity of listings available for those with an assessment based practice. Craig also went to the “Online Chat” section, but it did not work on his computer [It didn’t work on mine either.] Both Craig and Mary went to the “Breaking News” section. Craig said he liked the content listed, but wanted to see more references. Mary liked that there are state updates there and said that she believed this section should be featured more prominently within the site. She added that she wished there could be statistics available there regarding the independent practice of psychology (e.g., managed care reimbursement rates, number of practitioners per capita around the country, etc.). After they were done I asked the users to fill in a 10-item questionnaire. The questions, and their responses are on the table beginning on the next page. That’s it for these users’ experience. I’ve done a number of these usability studies, and, I’ll tell you, psychologists are tough customers. {One of these months, if my self-esteem feels intact, I’ll have to arrange for a few psychologists to do a usability study of my website.) My experience using the site was consistent with the users. I was very impressed by the breath and depth of practical content on this site. If you haven’t been there yet I can guarantee you that you will find a plethora of useful resources there to support your practice and professional development. On the other hand, the organizational structure is very difficult to follow and compromises the users ability to access the stunning array of content. So, the suggestions I will offer primarily regard this issue. Regarding the homepage, I would try to make it much simpler. I’d remove the bars on the side and top, which occupy precious pixel space, and add a single picture (maybe a picture of a vogue-looking psychologist with a welcoming smile). I’d try to streamline the categories to six headings, creating rollovers for the subheadings (i.e., the subheadings would not appear until the users mouse is dragged over the heading). Of course, a number of these subheadings would offer additional subheadings which could either be articulated on each subpage or by way of additional rollovers on the homepage. (It seems that the section that would have the most subheadings would be the resources section). Shooting from the lip, I might try as follows:
I would then endeavor to keep these same captions, using a smaller font, at the top, or on the left side, on each page within the site. I would also feature a search engine prominently on the home page. Nielsen’s internet ratings indicate that the most commonly used search engines are Google, Yahoo and MSN. Hence, I entered search terms that I thought a psychologist might use to find content located within the member’s section. Below are the search terms I used and the results across the three search engines. There is another search engine on the internet that I sometimes use to find material that I can’t find on the big three. Not only will it sometimes find websites that the others don’t, but it also encourages searches to be entered by way of a question. This site is www.askjeeves.com. I entered two questions: How can I support my psychology practice? What help is there to support my practice in psychology? The division’s website did not appear on first three pages for either search. If the purpose of the website is only to serve those members who know about it, then none of the search engine issues matter much. However, if part of the goals of the site are (1) to increase membership to the division or (2) to make the information there readily available to members who do not know about it, then some tweaking would probably help. A few ticky-tac things: I might put an instruction on the log in page for the members’ section on how to log in (it is on the homepage, but repeating it there might help). I might also try to scale back on the jargon on the listserv page, if possible. Of course, I’d remove any busted links. In the links section I might also consider offering links to relevant electronic journal offerings and additional self-help offerings (e.g., support groups, literature, etc.). Finally, I’d type out the email addresses for the email links as some users’ browsers are not configured to link to their email software.
In closing let me be very clear about something. This site exists because a chorus of volunteers was willing, and continues to be willing, to invest their time and talents for our collective benefit. In some instances (i.e., the internet editors) the collective term of service is six years or longer! To each of you I say bravo and thank you very much! That this website incorporates such a remarkable range of helpful content is very impressive. If the site stays exactly as it is it will continue to be a formidable offering. On the other hand, should it become reorganized, should it become more search engine friendly and should it continue to grow in it’s offerings, it would become a one-of-a kind and indispensable internet resource for practicing psychologists.
That’s it for now. In the next edition I will hope to offer a usability study of the non-member section of the division’s website. Until next time, web on! |
|||
