references/usability-testing-frameworks.md
A supporting file of the ux-researcher-designer skill.
Usability Testing Frameworks
Reference for planning and conducting usability tests that produce actionable insights.
Table of Contents
- Testing Methods Overview
- Test Planning
- Task Design
- Moderation Techniques
- Analysis Framework
- Reporting Template
Testing Methods Overview
Method Selection Matrix
| Method | When to Use | Participants | Time | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderated remote | Deep insights, complex flows | 5-8 | 45-60 min | Rich qualitative |
| Unmoderated remote | Quick validation, simple tasks | 10-20 | 15-20 min | Quantitative + video |
| In-person | Physical products, context matters | 5-10 | 60-90 min | Very rich qualitative |
| Guerrilla | Quick feedback, public spaces | 3-5 | 5-10 min | Rapid insights |
| A/B testing | Comparing two designs | 100+ | Varies | Statistical data |
Participant Count Guidelines
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ FINDING USABILITY ISSUES │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ % Issues Found │
│ 100% ┤ ●────●────● │
│ 90% ┤ ●───── │
│ 80% ┤ ●───── │
│ 75% ┤ ●──── ← 5 users: 75-80% │
│ 50% ┤ ●──── │
│ 25% ┤ ●── │
│ 0% ┼────┬────┬────┬────┬────┬──── │
│ 1 2 3 4 5 6+ Users │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Nielsen's Rule: 5 users find ~75-80% of usability issues
| Goal | Participants | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Find major issues | 5 | 80% coverage, diminishing returns |
| Validate fix | 3 | Confirm specific issue resolved |
| Compare designs | 8-10 per design | Need comparison data |
| Quantitative metrics | 20+ | Statistical significance |
Test Planning
Research Questions
Transform vague goals into testable questions:
| Vague Goal | Testable Question |
|---|---|
| "Is it easy to use?" | "Can users complete checkout in under 3 minutes?" |
| "Do users like it?" | "Will users choose Design A or B for this task?" |
| "Does it make sense?" | "Can users find the settings without hints?" |
Test Plan Template
PROJECT: _______________
DATE: _______________
RESEARCHER: _______________
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
1. _______________
2. _______________
3. _______________
PARTICIPANTS:
• Target: [Persona or user type]
• Count: [Number]
• Recruitment: [Source]
• Incentive: [Amount/type]
METHOD:
• Type: [Moderated/Unmoderated/Remote/In-person]
• Duration: [Minutes per session]
• Environment: [Tool/Location]
TASKS:
1. [Task description + success criteria]
2. [Task description + success criteria]
3. [Task description + success criteria]
METRICS:
• Completion rate (target: __%)
• Time on task (target: __ min)
• Error rate (target: __%)
• Satisfaction (target: __/5)
SCHEDULE:
• Pilot: [Date]
• Sessions: [Date range]
• Analysis: [Date]
• Report: [Date]Pilot Testing
Always pilot before real sessions:
- Run 1-2 test sessions with team members
- Check task clarity and timing
- Test recording/screen sharing
- Adjust based on pilot feedback
Pilot Checklist:
- Tasks understood without clarification
- Session fits in time slot
- Recording captures screen + audio
- Post-test questions make sense
Task Design
Good vs. Bad Tasks
| Bad Task | Why Bad | Good Task |
|---|---|---|
| "Find the settings" | Leading | "Change your notification preferences" |
| "Use the dashboard" | Vague | "Find how many sales you made last month" |
| "Click the blue button" | Prescriptive | "Submit your order" |
| "Do you like this?" | Opinion-based | "Rate how easy it was (1-5)" |
Task Construction Formula
SCENARIO + GOAL + SUCCESS CRITERIA
Scenario: Context that makes task realistic
Goal: What user needs to accomplish
Success: How we know they succeeded
Example:
"Imagine you're planning a trip to Paris next month. [SCENARIO]
Book a hotel for 3 nights in your budget. [GOAL]
You've succeeded when you see the confirmation page. [SUCCESS]"Task Types
| Type | Purpose | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Exploration | First impressions | "Look around and tell me what you think this does" |
| Specific | Core functionality | "Add item to cart and checkout" |
| Comparison | Design validation | "Which of these two menus would you use to..." |
| Stress | Edge cases | "What would you do if your payment failed?" |
Task Difficulty Progression
Start easy, increase difficulty:
Task 1: Warm-up (easy, builds confidence)
Task 2: Core flow (main functionality)
Task 3: Secondary flow (important but less common)
Task 4: Edge case (stress test)
Task 5: Free exploration (open-ended)Moderation Techniques
The Think-Aloud Protocol
Instruction Script: "As you work through the tasks, please think out loud. Tell me what you're looking at, what you're thinking, and what you're trying to do. There are no wrong answers - we're testing the design, not you."
Prompts When Silent:
- "What are you thinking right now?"
- "What do you expect to happen?"
- "What are you looking for?"
- "Tell me more about that"
Handling Common Situations
| Situation | What to Say |
|---|---|
| User asks for help | "What would you do if I weren't here?" |
| User is stuck | "What are your options?" (wait 30 sec before hint) |
| User apologizes | "You're doing great. We're testing the design." |
| User goes off-task | "That's interesting. Let's come back to [task]." |
| User criticizes | "Tell me more about that." (neutral, don't defend) |
Non-Leading Question Techniques
| Leading (Don't) | Neutral (Do) |
|---|---|
| "Did you find that confusing?" | "How was that experience?" |
| "The search is over here" | "What do you think you should do?" |
| "Don't you think X is easier?" | "Which do you prefer and why?" |
| "Did you notice the tooltip?" | "What happened there?" |
Post-Task Questions
After each task:
- "How difficult was that?" (1-5 scale)
- "What, if anything, was confusing?"
- "What would you improve?"
After all tasks:
- "What stood out to you?"
- "What was the best/worst part?"
- "Would you use this? Why/why not?"
Analysis Framework
Severity Rating Scale
| Severity | Definition | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Critical | Prevents task completion | User cannot proceed |
| 3 - Major | Significant difficulty | User struggles, considers giving up |
| 2 - Minor | Causes hesitation | User recovers independently |
| 1 - Cosmetic | Noticed but not problematic | User comments but unaffected |
Issue Documentation Template
ISSUE ID: ___
SEVERITY: [1-4]
FREQUENCY: [X/Y participants]
TASK: [Which task]
TIMESTAMP: [When in session]
OBSERVATION:
[What happened - factual description]
USER QUOTE:
"[Direct quote if available]"
HYPOTHESIS:
[Why this might be happening]
RECOMMENDATION:
[Proposed solution]
AFFECTED PERSONA:
[Which user types]Pattern Recognition
Quantitative Signals:
- Task completion rate < 80%
- Time on task > 2x expected
- Error rate > 20%
- Satisfaction < 3/5
Qualitative Signals:
- Same confusion point across 3+ users
- Repeated verbal frustration
- Workaround attempts
- Feature requests during task
Analysis Matrix
┌─────────────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┐
│ Issue │ Frequency │ Severity │ Priority │
├─────────────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────┤
│ Can't find X │ 4/5 │ Critical │ HIGH │
│ Confusing label │ 3/5 │ Major │ HIGH │
│ Slow loading │ 2/5 │ Minor │ MEDIUM │
│ Typo in text │ 1/5 │ Cosmetic │ LOW │
└─────────────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┘
Priority = Frequency × SeverityReporting Template
Executive Summary
USABILITY TEST REPORT
[Project Name] | [Date]
OVERVIEW
• Participants: [N] users matching [persona]
• Method: [Type of test]
• Tasks: [N] tasks covering [scope]
KEY FINDINGS
1. [Most critical issue + impact]
2. [Second issue]
3. [Third issue]
SUCCESS METRICS
• Completion rate: [X]% (target: Y%)
• Avg. time on task: [X] min (target: Y min)
• Satisfaction: [X]/5 (target: Y/5)
TOP RECOMMENDATIONS
1. [Highest priority fix]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]Detailed Findings Section
FINDING 1: [Title]
Severity: [Critical/Major/Minor/Cosmetic]
Frequency: [X/Y participants]
Affected Tasks: [List]
What Happened:
[Description of the problem]
Evidence:
• P1: "[Quote]"
• P3: "[Quote]"
• [Video timestamp if available]
Impact:
[How this affects users and business]
Recommendation:
[Proposed solution with rationale]
Design Mockup:
[Optional: before/after if applicable]Metrics Dashboard
TASK PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
Task 1: [Name]
├─ Completion: ████████░░ 80%
├─ Avg. Time: 2:15 (target: 2:00)
├─ Errors: 1.2 avg
└─ Satisfaction: ★★★★☆ 4.2/5
Task 2: [Name]
├─ Completion: ██████░░░░ 60% ⚠️
├─ Avg. Time: 4:30 (target: 3:00) ⚠️
├─ Errors: 3.1 avg ⚠️
└─ Satisfaction: ★★★☆☆ 3.1/5
[Continue for all tasks]Quick Reference
Session Checklist
Before Session:
- Test plan finalized
- Tasks written and piloted
- Recording set up and tested
- Consent form ready
- Prototype/product accessible
- Note-taking template ready
During Session:
- Consent obtained
- Think-aloud explained
- Recording started
- Tasks presented one at a time
- Post-task ratings collected
- Debrief questions asked
- Thanks and incentive
After Session:
- Notes organized
- Recording saved
- Initial impressions captured
- Issues logged
Common Metrics
| Metric | Formula | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Completion rate | Successful / Total × 100 | >80% |
| Time on task | Average seconds | <2x expected |
| Error rate | Errors / Attempts × 100 | <15% |
| Task-level satisfaction | Average rating | >4/5 |
| SUS score | Standard formula | >68 |
| NPS | Promoters - Detractors | >0 |
See also: journey-mapping-guide.md for contextual research