[Sigia-l] Questioning common test scripting

Livia Labate liv at livlab.com
Mon Jun 9 22:08:06 EDT 2003


> "InfoArchitect" <InfoArchitect at ourbrisbane.com>
: When preparing participants, how many of you include
: "We are not testing you" in your script? [...] 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?

Precisely because of the reverse stimulus, the test participants should
*understand* they are not being tested, instead of being told so. I think
your focus (the script wording) is the exact tool for it. Even before,
during the recruiting process, I like to try to pass the following messages:
"help us test X", "assist us in evaluating Y", etc, making it clear *what*
is being tested (or verified or evaluated - I'm saying this because it
serves any kind of test, not just usability testing).

The fact that the participants are not being tested becomes obvious without
the need to tell them that in big words, thus avoiding the reverse stimulus.
It also helps empowering them to work *with* the folks conducting the test
because the test participants feel they are in equal terms (standing in the
same grounds as the test team in relation to the test subject, which is the
product in question).

In a way, it's thinking of the test participants as part of the testing
group; they just don't hold as much information - I could say that the test
participant is the 'operational' part while the test team is the 'tactic'
one; they do the ground work while we analyze.

A positive message ("help us test X") works better than a negative one("we
are not testing you"). A note: this is purely empirical and [since I suspect
the question may arise], I have no research to back it up, but works for me.

Livia Labate
_______________________________
liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com




More information about the Sigia-l mailing list