The Five Second Test (for sample To-Do List)

1. What was the app for? Looks like it could be a search feature of some sort.
2. Did you want to use it? Yes, even though I did not know exactly what it was, the simplicity of the design was inviting—probably because it looked to me like I wouldn’t screw anything up by messing around with it.
3. If so, what would you do first? I would probably type “test” in the text field and click the button to see what happens.

1. Note anything relevant that occurred to you during our discussion.

Students seemed to have some similar thoughts and reactions to the tool. As we discussed the artifact, I was reminded of the many focus group studies I participated in in the 2010s as I sought to supplement my income and pay off student loans. I learned so much about market research and facilitating focus groups from these.

1. Note your thoughts about 5 second testing as a Usability tool.

The 5 second test is useful because we know that many prospective users/buyers are going to make decisions based on very initial impressions of a product. The book gets judged by its cover whether we like it or not. Therefore, seeking the first thoughts one has provides the designer the chance to better evaluate the product and make necessary changes. With enough data from a strong enough sample of 5 second users, the designer should be able to figure out which elements are most appealing to the largest number of potential users.

Heuristic analysis

1. visibility of system status — keep users informed about behind the screen processing, loading, successfully uploaded, searching please wait

The importance of status visibility depends on the artifact, but the spinning wheel of death, as it is sometimes called, is one way software/web tools let us know something is going on and we (as users) do not need to do anything else—yet. I do think the visuals that show percentages of status progress are far more helpful than those that do not.

1. use familiar, real world, language — no jargon, no site-specific lingo

Again, this will depend on the artifact and audience, but in the case of a basic to do list meant for the general public, this is solid advice. They can’t use it easily if they don’t understand it.

1. users should be in control — nothing relevant to the experience should be happening behind the screen

This hints at transparency and data security too. We can have users forfeit control (of their data and usage behavior) by including a long terms and conditions page (that they won’t read) and have them mindlessly click “agree” so the artifact can take control of whatever benefits the designer. I do not think this kind of unethical strategy should be employed, but it does feel more like the norm today.

1. follow industry standards — CNTRL S means save regardless of platform or Cmd because Apple

It is also important to keep up with changing standards then. People (young ones, especially) are always tweaking the way technology is used, and if a designer only sticks to the standards of their time, they will be missing opportunities to improve their products usability.

1. don’t let users make mistakes — multiple levels of undo, popup in place warnings about required form fields, greyed out representation of features unavailable in the current context

This means that the designer needs as much usage data as possible to see what mistakes can be made. This is hard to predict. Just like how people can find creative ways to use a product that were completely unexpected, they can also find an infinite number of ways to misuse a product so that it doesn’t work at all.

1. recognition over recall — don’t make users remember or have to think

The whole point of technology is to make tasks easier. The harder the user has to work or think, the less need they are going to have for that particular tech.

1. flexible designs — experts should have shortcuts and other tools that aren’t visible to novices who will be distracted or confused by them

Interesting concept. Not sure I agree completely, but it does make sense to at least let users know in some logical way that advanced features are available to more expert users. We see this many times indicated with an “advanced” button that reveals those features. That seems like a good application of this design principle.

1. minimalist design — don’t clutter the screen, don’t add images as decoration

Yes! Yes! Yes! I can’t imagine anyone loves their screens cluttered with ads and things they don’t need. This should be #1 on the list. Only add what is needed. As for not adding images for decoration, I might argue that some images that appear to be decoration are really serving some important other purpose as well, like appealing to emotion. A picture of a tropical island might have the effect of calming the user, and paired with music (that some would initially think is superfluous) could actually have a positive effect on the user’s experience.

1. no error should be fatal — offer clear signposts and ways to start over efficiently, auto populate form data when possible

I have not put much thought into this yet, but I can see how one fatal error would lose a user for good. As for auto-populating, that is helpful most of the time. I always appreciate when “United States” is listed at the top of a dropdown that is otherwise alphabetical. I hope for users in other countries, the designers make their country rise to the top based on ip address or something—especially for our friends in Zambia.

1. provide help — but design so no one needs it (and assume no one will read it)

But what help will the user need? How many avenues of help are enough? Chatbot features can sometimes be helpful, but they have a history of being frustrating too. Not to mention they can clutter a screen. I still appreciate a live chat with a human assistant, but those are not always practical. FAQ pages are hit or miss; the most thorough can be too long to work through, and the more basic will miss too many common issues. User input is essential to determine where the help should be provided.