On Saturday, November 16, 2013, Jared Zimmerman wrote:
>
>
> First step in any of this is getting some instrumentation, without this
> we're just guessing at how many users it affects. We should at least
> capture how many expose the menu and how many click on the options within
> in.
>

Good point. If we can just know what % of viewers (logged in and not) click
through now, that's a great start.


>
>

> *Jared Zimmerman * \\  Director of User Experience \\ Wikimedia
> Foundation
> M : +1 415 609 4043 |   :  @JaredZimmerman<https://twitter.com/JaredZimmerman>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Steven Walling 
> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');>
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Jon Robson 
>> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> If the A/B
>>> test is limited to anonymous users on all pages, then I would expect
>>> us to still be able to deduce whether minor changes to the UI
>>> encourage clicking (in an audience if 30% of that has never clicked
>>> the icon we would still see differences in click through rate in an
>>> A/B test as 15% of those would be captured in the A/B test).
>>>
>>
>> You can observe an increase or decrease, but the point is that it's
>> meaningless data, because there is no way to determine that what caused it
>> with any certainty. This means you can run a test and collect data, but you
>> can't answer a question like "Does this version make it easier to find the
>> menu, compared to the old version?"
>>
>> Compare this to tests mobile has run on newly-registered users. While you
>> can't guarantee that they've all never made an account before, we know
>> through careful analysis that it's very likely that the vast majority of
>> new registrations are in fact new people. So when we do a random 50/50
>> split of new registrations, we're comparing the behavior of two similar
>> populations of users who have never been exposed to both treatments in an
>> A/B test.
>>
>> With a random set of readers, you're getting a huge selection of users
>> who might be new, and also many users who have seen some permutation of the
>> site before. With a test like this, there's no way to ensure that a result
>> isn't just do to effects like random exploratory clicking because you
>> introduced something new to people who are
>>
>

-- 
Steven Walling,
Product Manager
https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design

Reply via email to