@Kathy I would love to disagree with you that Remote can not totally replace other methods. But as one of the methods we use to test our own unmoderated remote testing method is the lab, I would be hypocrite if I did. Each method has it advantages and disadvantages.
Many people are pointing out different types of Unmoderated Remote Testing methods, and trying to compare them, which is like comparing apples and oranges. My partner Sabrina Mach has posted a blog post explaining the different types of Unmoderated Remote Testing methods http://blog.feralabs.com/2009/02/is-all-remote-usablity-testing-the-same/ which explains the different types of remote testing. For example the tool that @caroline points to is a task-based online questionnaire. Chalkmark tests where users click on a static page. Webnographer uses the Combined method. Back to your statement if remote replaces lab. Most of our clients to date are using Webnographer <http://webnographer.com> where no testing has been done before. For example we are testing a site in about 9 countries, the expense of using a traditional method would be more than the cost of developing the software. Another test we are running is a weekly test for a client as they iterate through different designs. Again traditional methods would be uneconomic. All the best James http://blog.feralabs.com 2009/4/8 kathy neuss <[email protected]> > Hi Toby, > > I see unmoderated remote testing tools as a useful addition to the > tools available within the user research field. However, in no way > should they replace existing and established methodologies. > > I recently used Chalkmark (for some internal testing - in as much to > see how it works, and whether I could add the data from the tool into > the data from a larger program of research). I have also been > investigating automated tools to be used within benchmark usability > testing. > > However, I am complete disagreement with any tool, that thinks that > it can replace experience, and am put off from using Chalkmark again > because of a recent press release... > "A New Zealand company called Optimal Workshop is trying to disrupt > the usability space by offering free software that replaces > consultants. Instead of hiring someone, you can use Optimal%u2019s > web-based products to test mockups, usability, navigation, and site > architecture." > > Full article here: > > http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/03/31/changing-face-usability-testing-chalkmark-releases-free-service-called-treejack > > > A case of biting that hand that feeds it... > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Posted from the new ixda.org > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=41078 > > > ________________________________________________________________ > 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 > ________________________________________________________________ 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
