On Oct 2, 2008, at 7:42 AM, Paul Eisen wrote:
Jared said,
The Big Assertion: Users are looking for something specific on the
site.
If the user is on the page that has their specific target, then they
don't need *any* navigation (either local or global).
If the page they're on doesn't have the target content, then they
need
to find scent (a link with good trigger words) to that content.
If good, clear local navigation gets them to target content, then
they
don't need any global navigation.
Yes, this makes sense. And as a philosophy it provides good
incentive to anticipate what they users could possibly be looking
for, so the designer can provide those options locally. However,
often there are just too many things the user might want to do, and
in my experience it's usually not possible to anticipate them all.
Yes, but that's a problem with research. Perfect research (which, like
anything perfect, is only an ideal) would anticipate all the needs and
inform the design thusly.
The designer could set a target of attempting to satisfy x% of the
navigation needs with local nav (x = 90%? 95% 99%). But for those
fringe needs, the global nav does provide the backbone to enable the
user to explore with confidence. Exploring with confidence also
offers the advantage of serving up options that were not originally
considered or "needed" by the user, but may offer opportunities for
value exchange. So the global nav may help squeeze a little extra
value out of the site, for those users so motivated.
Which is why we say that site maps and global nav is a 'design cop-
out' -- something you do because your research and design process is
flawed. Resorting to a cop-out isn't evil, it's just a necessity of
having limited time and resources.
However, the designer should know they are copping out and walk away
feeling that, with more time and resources, they would've gone for a
better design. More importantly, subsequent designers should look at
those elements, realize their necessity and cop-out-ness and not make
stupid assertions like "the best sites have site maps so we should too."
I don't know how you measured that "users appreciated gaining a sense
of the scope from the global navigation"
Users viewed various home-page design styles, one of which provided
a structured overview of the web site 3 levels deep. Users
consistently chose this home-page design style over traditional
styles (e.g., big hero image, a few key links, main nav).
So, if I understand this correctly, this was based on presenting
designs and asking opinions. We know, from a ton of experience in
researching design, that this method of measuring doesn't reflect any
results from performance-based measures. What users say they like and
what they actually do with the site are two different things.
When we measure trust and satisfaction in performance-based
experiments, we find these two attributes are highly correlated to
task completion -- the more the user completes their task, the more
they say they trust the designer/design owners and the more satisfied
they are. This is different than when we do opinion-based evaluations,
where trust and satisfaction come from other attributes.
This is why MySpace and Craigslist proved so popular, despite the
design world's sense of fugliness.
Sure, there's the local-nav argument: they could drive right where
they needed. But their comments were consistent and revealing. They
pointed to the fact that seeing the full breadth of the scope,
structured in a way that made sense to them, gave them confidence
that the site had what they needed, and was comprehensive.
Subjective ratings of "trust" were highest for this design style, as
were reports of the probability that they would return.
Ah, the problems with observations and inferences. I contend your
measurement instrument was highly flawed, so I wouldn't put so much
weight into your measures.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it. :)
Jared
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
