[Sigia-l] Questioning common test scripting

[InfoArchitect]

Hey all (please excuse any cross posts),

I've just been reviewing/comparing some common usability testing 
techniques and have come across a pattern that surprised me.  When 
preparing participants, how many of you include "We are not testing 
you" in your script?  

The concept behind this scripting is sound - to put the participant at 
ease, conveying that you are not in fact testing the user, but the 
system.  If test subjects are not at ease during user testing, the 
data will be confounded.

Unfortunately, this technique is inconsistent with the research of 
Wegner (1994) who has shown that "not thinking" about certain things 
can be taxing, if not impossible when specifically directed.  The part 
of his research that interests me is his famous "White Bear" challenge 
(often used as a child’s joke).    He directed his subjects to NOT 
think of a white bear.  Wegner found that thought suppression actually 
increases the likelihood of thinking about the suppressed image and 
can extract an autonomic cost.  The subjects could not help but 
immediately visualise the white bear.

Thus, I propose that using (what seems to be) the very common 
scripting of “We are NOT testing you” does the opposite of what it is 
trying to do.  Upon being presented with this stimulus, participants 
should, in fact feel that they are the ones being tested, and will not 
act in a natural manner, confounding the results.

If some of you don't use this wording, how do you convey the fact that 
you are testing the system and not the user?

(Oh, and for the interest of keeping the discussion ‘on topic’, let’s 
assume that this statement is posed during a field test, in the 
participant’s natural environment.  I don’t want to go through a 
debate on environment, context or habituation.)

I'll be interested to see what comes of this.

Regards,

Ash Donaldson
User Experience Designer


----------------
Get your free email address from www.ourbrisbane.com