The purpose of this paper is to share the process, findings and conclusions from one library’s iterative usability study of its website design to inform other libraries as they perform their own assessments.
A task-completion usability study was conducted with eight undergraduate students across two iterations: the first gauged the usability of a redesigned library website and the second gauged the effectiveness of the first iteration’s findings.
We found that users performed better when the site provided multiple access points to the same information, displayed a prominent chat feature, limited the amount of text on a given page and avoided library jargon. Not only was the second round of testing important for confirming that first-round recommendations were effective but also it proved useful in catching a problem with the site that was unintentionally created during the time between tests.
No demographic data were collected during the study, thus hindering our ability to analyze our users through these data points.
This study demonstrates the value of iterative usability testing, especially when untested changes made between site versions may produce usability issues.
