WORKAHOLICS

WE BM D R E PO RT

Usability Test and Results on WebMD

Performed and Written by Ryan Gavin, Thomas Sabella, Stephanie Chapa, and Samuel Curtis. 04/17/2014

Letter of Transmittal
Workaholics 123 ABC Street Dearborn, MI 48120 (123) 456-7890 WebMD 111 8th Ave 7th Floor New York City, NY 10011 (212) 624-3700 April 17, 2014
To WebMD Executive Board and CEO, As requested, we will conduct a usability test on your website, WebMD. In this test, we will construct several methods to search for solutions for a better page layout for you and your users benefit. As you know, WebMD is used by roughly 15,000,000-16,000,000 people, based on data from between the time of August 2013 through March 2014 (Quantcast). Visitors to the site rely on it for medical advice to their current conditions and symptoms. We, Workaholics, have looked into your website in general for layout purposes and any technical concerns. Having done extensive research with your website, we will create a usability test to look into these major areas, and then analyze the results to give you proper solutions. Some of our potential trouble areas are: Company Logo Placement Homepage Organization Button and Link Quantity Amount of Ads on Homepage Ease of Access to Major Attractions (I.E. the Symptom Checker) With the research we collected, our group created a usability test to help you increase customer satisfaction. We will have four average target users test the site following a simple pre-written checklist which looked for simple usability constants and asked to rate and comment on them (rating occurred on a scale of 1-10). The users will then begin to browse the site and fill out the checklist. Ratings and comments will be recorded, and some preliminary discussion about how to solve the issues will begin amongst the team. It is our goal to assist WebMD in creating a more reliable and easy to utilize website for your current and future customers.

Sincerely, The Workaholics

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents

1 2 3
4

Executive Summary

Introduction Method Results Discussion Conclusion Annotated Bib. Appendixes

5 6 7 8 10 11 13

List of Illustrations Figure 1.1 Trouble Issue Table Figure 1.2 Mouse Tracking Dots Figure 1.3 Mouse Tracking Main Areas
7 8 9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Workaholics interest in website usability has led us to test the usability of a reputable internet website, WebMD. The site is one of the leading destinations regarding medical information and has reached out for help perfecting aesthetics on the website to appeal to current and future users. Even though WebMD is regarded as a big name website, we still believe improvements could be made to help improve the usability, appearance, and flow. Because information is easily accessible in todays technological age, we believe that WebMD should tailor their website to meet the needs of every internet user, young, old, experienced and inexperienced. The Workaholics compiled and consulted information from various research sources and created a customized internet usability test. Then, the Workaholics put WebMD through the paces to discover where or what the website developers need to improve on and fix. With our results, later displayed in the report, we have a visual and written analysis of why the improvements would help. Basic issues like advertising placement and navigation will be covered more in-depth and discussed to relay what steps can be taken to improve design and flow.

INTRODUCTION
WebMD is one of the most popular sites on the internet, and one of the first consulted for medical reference. As such, the site should represent itself as professionally as possible. Unfortunately, with the current layout, WebMD isn't presenting a top-of-the-line experience for its users. This could be driving users away, especially if it goes unchecked. The solution to this problem is simple though. With a few layout changes, WebMD can prevent the chance of user loss. A list and explanation of each of the errors is available in our Usability Report. We have given a level of harm to each of the issues present, gave a solution to those issues, and also alternatives to the solution. The Workaholics are a group of level-headed individuals who have worked on several other usability tests. They are businesspeople who want to enhance the internet. In this report, the Workaholics will first explain their testing methods, present their results, discuss possible solutions, and conclude with their recommended course of action.

M E T H OD S

The Workaholics conducted two separate usability tests using a 12-question checklist along with numbered scale (1-10) consisting of the checklist items.

Images have appropriate ALT tags(Text-box that pops up while hovering over pictures) Company Logo is prominently placed Homepage is digestible in 5 seconds Clear path to company info/contact info Number of buttons/links is reasonable Company Logo is linked to homepage Site search is easy to access Critical content is located above the fold Ads and Pop-ups are unobtrusive Speed at which users are looking for something(Symptom Checker) The ability of the user to control what they are doing and where they are, at any given moment

When evaluating a design website, participants found that activity concentrated on three main areas: Website logo, Website description, and Selection Menu. Does the website have all three?

Ratings and comments were recorded and can be viewed in the appendix. After the testing was complete, we analyzed the results, especially the numbered scale, and began a group interpretation and discussion of the website. During the discussion, we spoke about possible solutions and alternatives, as well as the best route for WebMD to take, which will be investigated, in detail, further into the report.
R E S U LT S A N D S OL U T I ON S

After conducting tests on the website and finding errors thoroughly, along with testing these errors, we have come to a conclusion of what needs to be changed. These results are based on the checklist we formed for our usability test on your site, WebMD. 6

Starting off with minor errors, we looked into the size and placement of your company logo. Testers, while putting WebMD through the checklist test, found that the company logo is too small and inconspicuous up in the left-hand corner of the screen. This is an issue because a logo is everything when it comes to advertising and broadening a business, and in your case, your website. We then looked into ALT tags that should be placed on any website in general. Although its not too big of an issue, we spotted that there are no ALT tags or captions in association with the images placed on your website. Regarding major inaccuracies, we found three issues that could be critical to your website. There was no reason to go into further examination when it came to the issue of the digestibility of your website. WebMD has very useful information but the way it is laid out on the page is superabundant. We know that the tabs can be cut back to reduce confusion. If you take it upon yourselves to adhere to our suggestions and repair your site, it will most definitely promote your essential customer satisfaction and business. In relation to the layout clutter, there are obvious issues with ads and pop-ups all throughout the website. It can lead to users of the website with the initial thought that the website is not credible and potentially harmful to their hardware. It should be resolved before usage of the website is decreased. Lastly, not on a broad spectrum, is the symptom-checker. It is a great tool that your website features, however, the layout of it resembles an ad or pop-up. It is to your advantage that the symptomchecker is made more noticeable and clear so that more users will take your website into consideration when it comes to finding symptoms. Figure 1.1 below shows some of the biggest trouble areas. Issues Rate: 1-10 Above the Fold Content 8 Company Logo Placement 4 Page Layout 7 Ads and Pop-Ups 6 Symptom Checker 5 Figure 1.1- Trouble Issue Table: For this table, two of our members pointed out the main issues regarding the website. The other group members were tasked to run over the test and give rankings from 1-10 to the issues at hand. After comparing the individual rankings, we took the average of each issue and presented the resulting number on the graph.

DISCUSSION

The Workaholics found that there were numerous issues with the layout of the website. They are reviewed by the most severe/important to the least. These included:

Extraneous homepage clutter, such as; 1) Poor ad placement.

2) Most WebMD content is below the fold.

Symptom Checker link needs to be refurbished and emphasized. Search-bar needs to be enlarged and refined.

These issues can easily be fixed and the website can increase its traffic. During our research we discovered that mouse-tracking programs show the most common places a person looks and clicks (an example of these programs can be viewed in figures 1.2. and 1.3 (Cultra, Shane.)). This is at the top left-hand corner and left margin. These are both trouble spots, and yet can be potential saving graces for WebMD. The extraneous homepage clutter makes the first thing users see when utilizing WebMD an offputting cluster of ads, blue links, and large pictures, which is pushing WebMD content below the fold and making it far more unlikely to ever be consumed (above the fold is the amount of the website visible on initial viewing of the homepage without scrolling down (Cultra, Shane.)). Keeping WebMD content above the fold is important for the site, so we recommend that the advertisements get reduced in page space and number, as well as a redesign of the blue link list below the company logo. Another option would be to reduce the size of the main picture/article, or to remove the company advertisements on the right margin, freeing up space to present more content to viewers. We do suggest keeping the top of the page banner advertisement though, as it is the least intrusive.

Figure 1.2 Mouse Tracking Dots: The black dots represent where the mouse spends longer periods of time and traces movement allowing us to trace the users browsing.

Figure 1.3 Mouse Tracking Main Areas: The picture shows the most common areas a user sees on a homepage; the logo, information sidebars, and the central articles

The Symptom-Checker (4th biggest site flaw according to figure 1.1) is one the sites largest draws, and is in its current form a slight disappointment. The link is a box smaller than most ads on the page with a fuzzy image, making it look like a link to a virus or malicious plug-in. The current location of the application doesn't need to be changed. Optimizing the Symptom-Checker is a simple process, needing only to be blown up and clarified, keeping a sleek professional look in-line with the rest of the site. The search-bar and company logo (the least imposing issue according to figure 1.1) were our last erroneous findings. They should be prominent and located close to each other on the page. Unfortunately the search-bar is small and easy to miss, as well as being a distance away from the company logo, which also suffers a similar fate. For so critical a portion of the site, this is a crucial error. Although it takes second place to the issues listed above, we recommend that WebMD enlarges the size of the search-bar, as well as add an advanced search option to help refine searches. In addition the search-bar should be located next to the company logo, which needs to be enlarged. If these recommendations are followed, the site will benefit greatly in increased traffic.

C ON C L U S I O N

The Workaholics suggest that WebMD take this course of action with their website:

Lower the amount of advertisements on their page (keeping the top banner ad) Allow more WebMD content to be viewed above the fold Re-design blue list on left-hand homepage margin Enhance Symptom-Checker in size and picture/link quality Search-bar and logo should be enlarged Advanced search option should be included

The Workaholics believe that by making these changes WebMD will be more efficient. This efficiency will help lead to happier users and, most importantly, more revenue. The Workaholics would be more than happy to help with re-design and future consultation. We hope our efforts have benefitted WebMD to your satisfaction and we thank you for believing in our team.

10

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bastien, J.M. Christian. Usability testing: a review of some methodological and technical aspects of the method. International Journal of Medical Informatics, Apr. 2010. The article was used to define and develop tools to help conduct user tests. The topics that were chosen to display throughout the article were the number of participants that should take part in a user test, the test procedure, remote usability evaluation, usability testing tools, and evaluating mobile applications. Cultra, Shane. "Using MousePath to Find out Your Surfing Trends." Domain

Shane.ShaneCultra, 22 Feb. 2010. Web. 03 Apr. 2014.

The article goes through points that we found valuable to use for our usability test. The points that we found helpful were as visitors gain familiarity with a site, they approach it differently, hardly any movement to the right and 75% of the movement above the fold, and if you have ads on a right sidebar or upper right hand corner, they dont stand much of a chance. Flavin, Carlos. The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & management 43.1 Jan 2006: 1-14. North-Holland Pub. Co. 27 Mar 2014. For this article, we pointed quite a few strong points that did in fact help us with our usability test. Website usability is a very important part of the store's image and it influences shopping behavior in a similar way to those aspects of traditional establishments. The article made sure to include what IT System usability involves: Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Satisfaction. It also went in depth with Speed in which users can find what they are looking for., the ease of understanding the structure of a system, its functions, interface, and contents observed by the user., and the ability of the user to control what they are doing, and where they are, at any given moment. Folmer,. Architecting for usability: a survey. The Journal of systems and software 70.1 2004: 61-78. Elsevier. 25 Mar 2014. This article went more into the facts and statistics of website usability, which was to our advantage while conducting our usability test. Some of the facts and statistics are as visitors gain familiarity with a site, they approach it differently, when evaluating a design website, participants find that activity concentrated on three main areas: website logo, website description and selection menu, participants classified mouse movement data across the sites into several behavior categories: scrolling, reading, pause-think-read-go, and interacting with menus (graphical and text only), and 35% of people moved their mouse cursor while reading a webpage.

11

Nielson, Jakob. "Nielsen Norman Group." Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Nielsen Norman Group, 4 Jan. 2012. Web. 27 Mar. 2014. This article was used to question the goals a certain website is trying to achieve. A few points they mention to focus on for the website as a whole is learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors and satisfaction. Learnability: How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first time they encounter the design? Efficiency: Once users have learned the design, how quickly can they perform tasks? Memorability: When users return to the design after a period of not using it, how easily can they reestablish proficiency? Errors: How many errors do users make, how severe are these errors, and how easily can they recover from the errors? Satisfaction: How pleasant is it to use the design User Effect. 25 Point Website Usability Checklist. Strategic Web Usability, 2009. Web.25 Mar. 2014. This particular article was a major help to our usability test. It helped us with our own checklist that we established in order to proceed with the usability test. The main points we focused on were: font size/spacing is easy to read, flash & add-ons are used sparingly, company logo is prominently placed, tagline makes company's purpose clear, clear path to information, navigation labels are clear & concise, site search is easy to access, ads & pop-ups are unobtrusive

12

Appendixes
Results of Initial Usability Test

1. Site doesnt have any ALT-Tags. Arent truly necessary, as descriptions appear below the picture.8 2. The site does not prominently display the company logo. It is too small, becoming inconspicuous up in the left-hand corner. 6 3. No. Too much clutter. 2 4. No. It is hidden at the bottom by the copyright symbol in the smallest font on the page. 1 5. No. No. No. Just no. Theres too much. Too much! 2 6. *check mark* 8 7. *check mark* (always at top of page, same location) 8 8. *check mark* 8 9. There are no pop-ups, however there are many advertisements, which are distracting. Creates too much clutter. 4 10. The symptom-checker is very unobtrusive, being smaller than almost all the ads on the page. This critical feature needs to be more pre-dominantly placed. 3 11. Navigation about the site is no struggle. It has back tabs and displays site path. 8 12. *check mark* (components need some work; logo is too small, search-bar could be larger, there is no clear website description, and the selection bar, although present, is cluttered.) 6 .

13