Sorry Bryan, but I need to call this out: "testing a small number of representative users" as effective as "a lot of random users".
You give the impression that larger studies choose random users as test participants. You'll find that testing sessions run to meet statistical standards are required to select a representative sample in a highly structured and formalised manner. They choose 'users at random'; they don't choose random users. And the result is a much more rigorous representation of your audience. However, what happens on this large scale is not very different to what we do on a small scale when choosing users from each persona. This is a type of stratified random sample, and the way you select the representative from each is likely to be a fairly random method. None of which changes the point you were trying to make, which is that smaller tests can be highly effective, and a much more efficient use of your budget. Regards Steve 2009/10/2 Bryan Minihan <[email protected]> > Here's the link I've used before...from Jakob Nielsen. Argue his > credibility if you'd like, but in practice I've seen "testing a small > number > of representative users" as effective as "a lot of random users". > > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html > > -- Steve 'Doc' Baty | Principal | Meld Consulting | P: +61 417 061 292 | E: [email protected] | Twitter: docbaty | Skype: steve_baty | LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/stevebaty ________________________________________________________________ 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
