On 12/30/2015 03:45 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: > On 12/30/2015 12:47 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote: >> Good to meet several of you via Jitsi Meet on Monday. Here is an >> initial draft idea for a way to get feedback on introductory messaging >> from people who visit the Snowdrift.coop booth at SCALE. The idea would >> be to invite and encourage people to participate as a way to provide >> helpful feedback while also having whatever conversation and Q&A >> interests them, but of course to also be totally open to just having an >> informal conversation with anyone who prefers that. For people who do >> participate, it would be ideal to annotate their marked up screenshots >> during the followup conversation to ensure that their feedback is fully >> recorded, e.g. what does each checkmark, X, or ? actually mean. >> >> Please let me know your thoughts on this draft idea - especially those >> of you who will be hosting the booth. >> >> === >> >> Have a tent-style sign on the table: >> “Got a couple of minutes? Help Improve Our Intro Messaging While >> Learning About Snowdrift.coop.” >> >> Clipboards with pens attached and two double-sided pages stapled >> together to capture feedback: >> >> 1. Instruction page: >> >> - Please look over the following screenshots of drafts of our home page >> and “How it works” page. >> - Put a checkmark by anything that stands out to you as good / appealing >> / clear / effective. >> - Put an X by anything that seems problematic to you, e.g. confusing, >> offputting, triggers skepticism. >> - Put a ? by anything you have questions about. >> >> 2. Screenshot of home page. >> >> 3. Screenshot of “How it works” page. >> >> 4. Wrapup page: >> >> - Regarding Snowdrift.coop, based on the two web page screenshots I've >> looked at, I feel... >> Clear - - - - - - - Confused >> Bored - - - - - - - Excited >> Convinced - - - - - - - Skeptical >> >> - What one change would make Snowdrift.coop more appealing and/or >> effective for you? >> >> [space to write ] >> >> - Thank you! Now please discuss your feedback and questions with one of >> us hosting the booth. >> >> - Name & contact info (optional): ____________________ >> > I like the direction. I think the particular scope we might want to > cover might be different. Although homepage is essential, I'm less > concerned about that. I'm more concerned about the how-it-works and the > actual pledge prototype. > > Ideally, we could have the screenshots/mockups be the how-it-works stuff > (perhaps the first three things, as co-op is less essential), maybe on a > live computer as an option; and the screenshot or mockup of the pledge > interface. > > In your particular "clear… bored etc" rating, the positive/negative > valence should be consistent (positive all on the right seems more > familiar to me, i.e. higher score but order the scores from low to high, > left to right) > > I'd like to consider some pointed questions, maybe not written down n a > longer and longer survey but prepared for us to speak to people about. > Things like, "do you understand the scope of projects we plan to cover?" > or "what project(s) do you think would be the best fit for this system?" > > I'm also inclined to encourage people to check to sign up for mailing > lists / updates, maybe fill-out volunteer form (would still love your > feedback on https://snowdrift.coop/p/snowdrift/volunteer ) > > Finally, a side note as we prepare for SCALE: We should figure out how > to *strongly* emphasize (given the audience we expect) that we are > recruiting folks to participate and figure out the best ways to make > that compelling (make a difference! learn new skills! get an official > title [maybe not stated like that but something that sounds like a real > opportunity with recognition]!) and emphasize Haskell (should have some > decent things to attract Haskellers or wanna-be Haskellers), that we > work to include HTML/CSS/JavaScript folks too and help beginners, and > that we need help with legal things and co-op structure etc. too… > > In summary for that last paragraph: I want Haskellers to notice us and > say "oh! this is in Haskell!" and people who care about co-ops to say > "hey, I could help with co-op stuff" etc. but we have to balance things > because too many signals just becomes a mess. >
The mixture of right/left positive/negative is an intentional questionnaire design technique to increase the attention paid to the actual attribute words, and reduce the tendency for people to take a shortcut along the lines of "I generally feel positive about this so I'll answer near the right on everything without really reading or thinking about it". A different situation in which it /would/ be important to keep the order consistent and follow the familiar "positive on the right" convention, is if the scale was the same for each item - e.g. strongly disagree to strongly agree. But then it would be important to mix the valence of the statements with which you're expressing agreement or disagreement, e.g. one is how much to you agree that it's "easy to use" and another might be how much do you agree or disagree that it's "frustrating". (See http://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/system-usability-scale.html for an example.) I think the idea of preparing pointed questions to ask in followup discussion is great. They should be open-ended rather than yes/no questions, e.g. "What are your thoughts about the scope of the projects we plan to cover?" I don't think they should be written down, since the initial feedback request should look as quick and easy as possible. I'd keep the scope small for the feedback part itself - at least for the initial request. There could then be an option to give feedback on more detailed pages for people who are interested enough after giving the initial bit of feedback. Or some people could get "home + how it works" and others could get "how it works + a more detailed page" - especially if you find you're getting plenty of people agreeing to do the feedback exercise. I'd keep the encouragement to sign up for the mailing list and volunteering separate from the feedback request. It's important for the feedback request to seem like a small and easy thing to agree to, even when you're not yet sure what Snowdrift.coop is about - and ideally as a fun and helpful way to engage in conversation with the booth host(s). It would be fine to point out the mailing list and volunteer options in conversation - I just wouldn't try to include it in printed feedback forms. I've made a note to fill out and give you feedback on https://snowdrift.coop/p/snowdrift/volunteer. I'll aim to get to that next week. (I'll be mostly unavailable the rest of this week.) Michael Michael Siepmann, Ph.D. The Tech Design Psychologist™ Shaping technology to help people flourish™ 303-835-0501 TechDesignPsych.com OpenPGP: 6D65A4F7
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
