[Sigia-l] Questioning common test scripting

[Listera]

"InfoArchitect" wrote:

> The point of this discussion is not how a professional can assess such
> states, but why it seems to be common practise to use a script that I
> hypothesise, would introduce a feeling of anxiety for participants,
> when the object is to study typical responses that would occur in a
> natural, relaxed environment.

This is about as rigorous as rolling the dice.

As a participant, why do I (have to) believe you, when you say you're not
testing me? I may just nod my head, but you'll never know what I really
think. The condition for the 'natural, relaxed environment' may have been
created (or destroyed) long before you get to the "We're not testing you"
phrase.

> I am wondering if the advent and subsequent popularity of ‘web usability’, is
> diluting scientific rigor in human factors/HCI/cognitive psychology evaluation
> techniques.

Another way of looking at it is to argue that the said popularity may have
exposed the lack of scientific rigor in those techniques.

Ziya
Nullius in Verba