I'd say B is really your only option ... all others involve some compromising of the test quality and results.
B's difficulty is really just logistics. A lot of people have weekly schedules, so scheduling two appointments, one for one day and then again next week, might work. In any case, you should probably plan for the inevitable no-shows for the 2nd round so have enough scheduled that if 1/3 of the people don't show up to the second one it won't be too much of a disaster. On 19-Mar-08, at 3:06 PM, Meredith Noble wrote: > > > a) Have a facilitator walk them through Section A for 15 minutes > before > they do the 60 minute Section B test (perhaps a bit overwhelming, hard > to digest) > > > > b) Ensure the participants who test Section A come back and test > Section > B (good in theory, but difficult to schedule) > > > > c) Test the two back-to-back in a 120-minute-long test (participants > might fade) > > > > d) Pretend the dependencies don't exist and have them test Section B > with no background knowledge (not realistic, but hey, maybe the others > are too ambitious) > ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
