Here are some interesting finds on UI/UX of the week!
Guerrilla Testing. Interesting article detailing what the concept behind Guerrilla testing is, and how to effectively gather insights from it. Having done it quite a few times, it’s definitely a good article on how to achieve validation on design efforts when resources are scarce. Highlight of the article includes:
“Guerrilla testing allows you to go out, and ask anyone their thoughts on your product or service. There is no waiting around for recruiters to find people exactly ‘on spec’ nor any travel costs for users. Guerrilla testing is also a great way to do ad hoc user research. Whether conducting competitor analysis for similar ideas or practicing your moderation skills. This type of testing will get you in front of anyone who says yes. And while they may not be your user, they are a user of something. They’ve probably used some piece of tech in their lifetime.”
Web Vs. Native Apps. Relevant article which offers a clear distinction between web and native applications. It also offers interesting examples on both, and what exactly differentiates them. As more and more articles are advocating for the creation of web apps, it’s definitely interesting to understand what these two universes are about.Highlight:
“Unlike native apps, web apps are exclusively accessed through an online browser (Google Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer!?) much like any other website. However unlike all the other boring, impersonal websites which show the same content to any old stranger who visits, a web app offers an individualized experience based on what the user wishes to achieve.”
Flat UI Elements and Uncertainty. A very pertinent article hailing from Nielsen Norman Group, which focuses on how the flat design movement/trend has created room for several issues on how users make interpretations of UI functionalities. Very interesting read. Highlight:
“We want our users to have experiences that are easy, seamless, and enjoyable. Users need to be able to look at a page, and understand their options immediately. They need to be able to glance at what they’re looking for and know instantly, “Yep, that’s it.” The problem is not that users never see a weakly signified UI element. It’s that even when they do see the weak element, they don’t feel confident that it is what they want, so they keep looking around the page. Designs with weak clickability signifiers waste users’ time: people need to look at more UI elements and spend more time on the page, as captured by heatmaps, average counts of fixations, and average task time. These findings all suggest that with weak signifiers, users are getting less of that feeling of empowerment and decisiveness. They’re experiencing click uncertainty.”