SayPro Usability Testing: Analyzing Participant Feedback

SayPro Usability Testing Analyze the feedback from participants and prioritize improvements based on their experience from SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 SayPro Monthly Inclusive Design: Ensure the site is accessible to users with disabilities by SayPro Online Marketplace Office under SayPro Marketing Royalty SCMR

Introduction

The core goal of usability testing is to identify potential barriers to accessibility and improve user experience for individuals with disabilities. After conducting usability testing sessions with users who have various disabilities, it’s crucial to thoroughly analyze the feedback received. This analysis allows for the identification of key issues and the prioritization of improvements that will have the most significant impact on enhancing the accessibility and usability of the SayPro website. This step is aligned with the SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 guidelines and SayPro Marketing Royalty SCMR, ensuring the site’s inclusive design and accessibility for users with disabilities.

---

1. Analyzing Feedback from Participants

1.1 Organizing the Feedback

After completing the usability testing sessions, the first step is to organize the feedback collected from participants. This feedback can be categorized into different types, such as:

• General Observations: Feedback based on the overall experience, such as how intuitive and easy to use the website was for participants with disabilities.
• Navigation Issues: Comments or feedback related to how participants navigated the site and whether they faced difficulties in moving through pages or completing tasks.
• Multimedia Accessibility: Feedback regarding video/audio content, such as the availability and accuracy of captions, the presence of audio descriptions, and accessibility of multimedia controls.
• Form and Input Accessibility: Feedback related to the ease of completing forms (e.g., registration, checkout), as well as accessibility for users with motor impairments, such as the ability to use keyboard navigation, screen readers, or other assistive technologies.
• Cognitive Load: Insights regarding how easy it was for participants with cognitive impairments to understand the site’s content, layout, and instructions.

1.2 Grouping Feedback into Categories

Once feedback is organized, group the responses into relevant categories to easily identify common themes and issues. This will allow for a clear understanding of which areas of the site need attention.

• Visual Impairment Challenges: Includes issues with alt text, color contrast, and images that are not readable with screen readers.
• Hearing Impairment Challenges: Includes lack of captions for multimedia content, audio files without transcripts, and video accessibility issues (e.g., absence of sign language or missing captions).
• Motor Impairment Challenges: Includes navigation problems when using assistive technologies like keyboard-only navigation, mouth sticks, or switches, and challenges interacting with buttons or forms.
• Cognitive Impairment Challenges: Includes issues with the clarity of text, instructions, or design elements that might confuse or overwhelm users with cognitive disabilities.

1.3 Identifying Key Issues

From the feedback gathered, identify the key issues that were repeatedly mentioned by participants. This helps in understanding which areas of the site are creating the most significant barriers to access and usability. Examples of key issues might include:

• Navigation Barriers: Screen reader users may struggle with navigating through menus or finding specific links.
• Captioning and Transcripts: Video or audio content without captions or transcripts may not be accessible to users who are deaf or hard of hearing.
• Form Interaction Problems: Keyboard-only users or users with motor impairments may find it difficult to interact with forms (e.g., dropdown menus, checkboxes, or buttons that are not keyboard accessible).
• Confusing Layout for Cognitive Impairments: Users with cognitive disabilities may have difficulty understanding or remembering multi-step processes (e.g., complicated checkout steps or long blocks of text).

---

2. Prioritizing Improvements Based on Severity and Impact

After analyzing the feedback, the next step is to prioritize the identified accessibility issues. Prioritization ensures that the most critical barriers to accessibility are addressed first, especially those that have the most significant impact on users with disabilities. Below are key considerations for prioritizing improvements:

2.1 Severity of the Issue

• High Severity: Issues that completely block access to the site or make it impossible for users to complete key tasks. For example:
  • Missing alt text on key images or buttons that render the site non-navigable for screen reader users.
  • Videos without captions, making multimedia content inaccessible to users with hearing impairments.
  • Forms that cannot be filled out using keyboard-only navigation or assistive technologies like voice commands or eye-tracking devices.
• Medium Severity: Issues that do not completely block access but make the user experience challenging or frustrating. For example:
  • Inconsistent color contrast that makes text hard to read for users with low vision or color blindness.
  • Cognitive overload due to poorly structured content or complex forms that confuse users with cognitive impairments.
  • Multimedia content with captions that are inaccurate or poorly timed.
• Low Severity: Issues that have minimal impact on the overall user experience. These might include minor design tweaks or content adjustments that can be addressed in future updates. For example:
  • Decorative images that lack alt text but do not impact core functionality or content comprehension.
  • Minor inconsistencies in layout that do not create significant barriers for navigation or comprehension.

2.2 User Impact

• High Impact: Prioritize changes that affect a large portion of users or have a substantial negative effect on the user experience. For example:
  • Users with motor impairments struggling to use forms due to non-intuitive layout or non-functional controls.
  • Hearing-impaired users who cannot access essential information due to missing captions or transcripts for key videos or audio files.
  • Blind or low-vision users who are unable to navigate the site or interact with important elements due to a lack of accessible alt text or poor color contrast.
• Moderate Impact: Issues that affect a subset of users but can still have a noticeable effect on their experience. For example:
  • Users with cognitive impairments having trouble with website layout or finding essential information due to overly complex designs or unclear instructions.
  • Hearing-impaired users encountering content without sign language interpretation or when captions are hard to read or incomplete.
• Low Impact: Issues that have a relatively minor effect on user experience but may still improve the overall accessibility. These may be cosmetic changes or enhancements that would benefit users without significantly affecting the overall functionality. For example:
  • Minor inconsistencies in text size or style for better readability.
  • A few missing labels on non-essential elements that do not impede navigation or task completion.

2.3 Cost of Implementation

While prioritization should mainly focus on user impact and severity, the cost of implementation is another factor to consider. Some accessibility improvements can be made quickly and inexpensively (e.g., adding alt text to images), while others may require more significant development resources (e.g., redesigning interactive forms to be more accessible or providing sign language interpretation for videos).

• High Priority (Low Cost): Immediate changes that can be implemented quickly with minimal resources, such as adding missing alt text, adjusting color contrast, or fixing broken links.
• High Priority (High Cost): Essential improvements that require significant development work, such as redesigning form controls for accessibility, improving video player functionality, or creating transcripts for large amounts of multimedia content.
• Low Priority (Low Cost): Small fixes that can be done in later updates, such as updating outdated content or improving the consistency of design elements.

---

3. Implementing Changes Based on Prioritized Feedback

Once improvements have been prioritized, the next step is to implement the necessary changes to the SayPro website.

3.1 Develop a Timeline for Changes

• Short-term Fixes: Implement the most critical changes, such as adding alt text, fixing keyboard navigation issues, or adding captions for essential videos, as soon as possible.
• Long-term Improvements: For more complex changes (e.g., redesigning the checkout flow for cognitive accessibility or providing sign language interpretation for videos), establish a timeline and assign resources to tackle these in the next phases of development.

3.2 Test Changes for Accessibility

• Once changes are implemented, it’s important to test the new functionality to ensure that they address the feedback from users with disabilities.
• Conduct a second round of usability testing with users who have disabilities to ensure that the issues have been resolved and that the site is now more accessible.
• Use both automated accessibility tools (like Axe or Lighthouse) and manual testing to check for issues across different devices and assistive technologies.

3.3 Communicate Changes to Stakeholders

• Update stakeholders, including the development team, marketers, and customer support, about the changes that have been made.
• Ensure that marketing materials and product descriptions reflect the new accessible features of the website, creating a more inclusive brand image.

---

4. Ongoing Monitoring and Iterative Improvements

Accessibility is an ongoing process, and it’s essential to continuously monitor the website for any new barriers as content or functionality changes. Use feedback from users with disabilities to inform future updates and design iterations, ensuring that accessibility remains a priority for SayPro.

---

Conclusion

Analyzing the feedback from participants in usability testing is a vital step in ensuring that the SayPro website is truly accessible to users with disabilities. By categorizing issues, evaluating the severity and impact on user experience, and prioritizing improvements based on these insights, SayPro can make targeted changes that will significantly enhance the user experience for all visitors. This approach supports the inclusive design goals of SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 and ensures that the site is accessible, usable, and compliant with accessibility standards.