AccessibilityOz uses the following design principles when analysing a current web site:

  • Matching experience and meeting expectation
  • Metaphor
  • Consistency – internal and external
  • Functional minimalism
  • Cognitive load
  • Engagement
  • Memory load
  • Functional layering
  • Visibility
  • Feedback and orientation
  • Direct manipulation
  • Mapping
  • Control, trust, and explorability
  • Error prevention, detection and recovery
  • Mousing and Fitt’s law
  • Affordance
  • Hierarchy of control
  • Spatial memory
  • Visual hierarchy
  • Natural reading order
  • Grouping
  • Visual weight
  • Visual balance
  • Visual minimalism
  • Visual rhythm and scanability
  • Aesthetics

Choosing the right UX metrics

The HEART model:

  • Happiness: measures of user attitudes, often collected via survey. For example: satisfaction, perceived ease of use, and net-promoter score.
  • Engagement: level of user involvement, typically measured via behavioral proxies such as frequency, intensity, or depth of interaction over some time period. Examples might include the number of visits per user per week or the number of photos uploaded per user per day.
  • Adoption: new users of a product or feature. For example: the number of accounts created in the last seven days or the percentage of Gmail users who use labels.
  • Retention: the rate at which existing users are returning. For example: how many of the active users from a given time period are still present in some later time period? You may be more interested in failure to retain, commonly known as “churn.”
  • Task success: this includes traditional behavioral metrics of user experience, such as efficiency (e.g. time to complete a task), effectiveness (e.g. percent of tasks completed), and error rate. This category is most applicable to areas of your product that are very task-focused, such as search or an upload flow.

Kerry Rodden

IA heuristics

IA heuristics (comes handy for review)

  1. Does the site structure match the tasks to be performed by the user?
  2. Does the apparent site complexity and functionality match the intended user need?
  3. Is the structure designed so as reduce the total number of navigational steps needed to reach the desired page?
  4. Are frequently needed and critical pages located near the top of the site structure, requiring a small number of clicks from the homepage?
  5. Does the structure convey an appropriate metaphor that facilitates user’s understanding of the site?
  6. Do the navigational labels provide meaningful, unambiguous summary of the pages?
  7. Do the labels use familiar and consistent terminology?
  8. Are the labels distinct from one another?
  9. Do important keywords stand out in the labels?
  10. Does the site promote learning of the location of pages in the site structure?
  11. Does site design build on our prior learning and experience of the intended users?
  12. Does the layout of the navigation facilitate visual scanning by the user?
  13. Do the number of pages per navigation level and the number of levels in the site structure optimise navigation time?
  14. Has random or arbitrary ordering of pages on a particular level in the site structure been avoided?
  15. Are pages on a particular level presented in a logical order to facilitate scanning?
  16. Are pages on a particular level ordered to reveal structure and relationships among them?
  17. Does the order of pages agree with the user’s expected ordering?

From Volkside: 17 guidelines for better information architecture…from 1991

Web standards

  1. All web pages should contain: title, site-identifier with link to
    home page, update date, navigation, contact, content p.120
  2. Standards “allow graceful degradation” apparently goes back to Jeffrey
    VEEN, The Art and Science of Web Design, 2000, New Riders
  3. Why it’s good to stick to conventions and difficult to create new
    communicational clues p.94 (sidebar)

From: Wroblewski, Luke (2002), Site-Seeing: A Visual Approach to Web-Usability, New York: Hungry Minds