Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements/Repository/Hureo User Research Report/ja

2020年1月より、インドに本拠を置く利用者調査会社 Hureo と共同で新規利用者ならびにたまに利用する閲読者がウィキペディアのデスクトップ版インターフェースをどのように使っているか、利用者調査の準備を進めてきました. 調査は2段階に分け、第1フェーズは主に英語版利用者を主眼とし、第2フェーズは2言語話者と非英語の読者が対象です. 調査の目標とは、新規参加者および読んだり検索したりするだけの利用者の体験を理解することで、サイトにいだく感想、サイトの使い方を調べ、特に信頼性と馴染みやすさのコンセプトに注目し、同時にサイトでよく使われる機能の使い心地を調べました. さらに加えて、使い心地全般ならびに機能特定の改善ができそうな領域の見極めに関心があります. 第1フェーズの調査結果は、インタビュー対象の24人の利用者から聞き取った同社の見解をレポートとして以下のとおり公開しました. 今後はこれらの成果を利用し、デスクトップ版の改善プロジェクトにおける将来の機能開発に情報提供する予定です.

フィードバックの手法
Hureo では、下記の調査の目標に合わせた聞き取り調査のスクリプトを作成しました.


 * 1) 溶け込みやすさと読みやすさ：当初はサイトに関してどう感じましたか？ 溶け込みやすかったでしたか？ 読むという体験全般の感想は？ サイトが何のためにあるのか、使い方はすぐに理解できましたか？ その内容すなわち知識の作成に、自分自身も参加できる ことは理解できましたか？
 * 2) Credibility and trust​: what are their impressions of credibility/trustworthiness of the site, and what informs these impressions? How do these impressions compare with other sites they use?

The study was performed using ethnographic interviews focusing on behavior observations with some task based questions. The study was focused on two categories on Wikipedia Users, with 12 participants in each group:


 * 1) Newcomers​: people with little to no familiarity with the desktop interface of Wikipedia. They may or may not have visited Wikipedia on their phone.
 * 2) Casual readers:​ people who use Wikipedia occasionally to regularly. They spend little to no time thinking about Wikipedia conceptually and probably don’t have a clear mental model of how Wikipedia works.

結果の要約
Positive


 * Depth and breadth of information: readers liked that Wikipedia contained in-depth information about many topics, and that they did not have to visit any other websites for additional information.
 * Images: readers appreciated the inclusion of images within the page.
 * Table of contents: readers appreciated the table of contents both as a navigation tool as well as as means of gaining an overview of the contents of a given page.
 * No advertisements: when compared to other websites readers highlighted that they appreciated the lack of advertisements on the page.
 * Language switching: readers appreciated the ability to switch languages on a page.

Challenges


 * Too much information: readers found the contents of the page overwhelming, in particular noting the lack of “segregated information”, which made it difficult for them to find what they were looking for.
 * Main menu/sidebar: readers were unable to understand the purpose of the Menu on the left hand side of the site, noting in particular that they did not understand the items in the menu (e.g. Related changes, Special Pages). They felt that it was not relevant for them.
 * Article tools: readers did not understand the terminology and concept of most of the article tools (e.g. Talk, Contributions).

Ideas


 * More images and video: we saw a number of requests for more images in the article. Some readers also wanted to see videos related to their topic embedded in the article.
 * More segregated information: the readers wanted to easily scan the article to find the specific information. They wished the information to be more segregated.
 * Ease of navigation: the readers were interested in navigating around the page in an easier way, for example, being able to go back to the Table of Contents or other places within the site without scrolling back to the top.
 * Easier access to the table of contents: some readers mentioned that they would like to see the table of contents throughout reading, perhaps in the form of tabs on the top or the left side of the page, so that they could see the contents of the entire article while reading a particular section.

Following steps

 * There also was the phase 2 of the Hureo-led user research with another report. This phase of the research focused on readers who do not use English as their primary language online. In addition to focusing on the usability and welcomeness of the current site, we also requested of participants to compare the current site to a prototype of some of our proposed changes as a part of this phase.
 * The results of this phase allowed us to confirm some of our previous hypotheses on site navigation. Mainly, that some aspects of the navigation are confusing and unhelpful to readers while others, which might otherwise be used frequently, were difficult to find. Additionally, this phase raised awareness on the importance of certain navigational elements, such as the table of contents. We will use the information in this report to iterate on and inform our feature development for the remainder of the desktop improvements project.