Scribd
Upload
62 views

Annotated-Usability 20memo

The document summarizes a usability test of instructions for accessing streamflow data from the USGS National Water Information System website. Four users tested the original instructions and provided feedback through a questionnaire. The results showed some strengths of the initial instructions but also areas needing improvement, like lack of detail in steps 5 and 6. Users provided recommendations, like outdated visuals and vague language, which were used to revise the instructions in Appendix B. The revisions aimed to address issues identified and improve guidance for finding and interpreting streamflow data on the site.

Uploaded by

api-470650269
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
62 views

Annotated-Usability 20memo

The document summarizes a usability test of instructions for accessing streamflow data from the USGS National Water Information System website. Four users tested the original instructions and provided feedback through a questionnaire. The results showed some strengths of the initial instructions but also areas needing improvement, like lack of detail in steps 5 and 6. Users provided recommendations, like outdated visuals and vague language, which were used to revise the instructions in Appendix B. The revisions aimed to address issues identified and improve guidance for finding and interpreting streamflow data on the site.

Uploaded by

api-470650269
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

Date: 07/09/19

To: United States Geological Survey Agency

From: The A-Team

Subject: Website Navigation and Streamflow Data Accessibility

Distribution List: Data Collection and System Supervisors

In this report, our team conducted a usability test on a set of instructions used to get streamflow
data from the USGS National Water Information System Web Interface. Four users were
observed navigating the site for the first time using these instructions. Then, they were given a
questionnaire on the usability of these instructions. Using their observations and responses, it
was determined that the test had some strengths as well as areas that needed improvement.
The users also provided different recommendations for a revised set of instructions.

Test Objectives
Users will use the site to access USGS data regarding the mean streamflow for a given
watershed area on the Catawba river in North Carolina.

Results
Areas of Strength
Initially, the instructions had few strong qualities. The text that directed the user was
appropriately sized in all areas. It was also legible, allowing for clear reading. Additionally, all of
the visuals (i.e., graphs, charts, and images) were at least partially helpful. This proved to be an
advantage over some of the vague and more confusing steps of the instructions. Lastly, the
instructions were fairly concise, with little overcrowded text or overwording. This lead to
reasonable completion times, allowing most users to briskly navigate and finish the tutorial.
Areas for Improvement
Within the original set of instructions, it was evident that there were numerous confusing
elements. One of the main issues with the instructions was the lack of detail and guidance in
steps five and six. This lack of detail failed in proper direction of where to go next and what to
look for. Another issue occurred in users failing to find the original link needed to access the
site, as it was listed before the first step and the color of the hyperlink blended in with blue of
site headings.

Questionnaire
The following questions, categorized into both close and open-ended questions, will determine
the user’s experience in the follow-up below.

Closed-Ended Questions

1. Did you complete the instructions?


2. Were there any parts you found frustrating?
3. Were any of the instructions lacking detail?
4. Were any of the instructions too simple?
Open-Ended Questions

1. What parts of the instruction were most effective?


2. What parts of the instruction were the most difficult to follow?
3. Should we have added additional instruction anywhere?
4. What parts were frustrating? If any?
5. Were any of the instructions lacking detail? If any?
6. Which visuals (graphs, tables, lists, etc) were appealing or confusing? If any?
7. What jargon, or technical language, wasn’t understood? If any?
8. Any other comments or concerns?
Recommendations
The users’ recommendations proved to be insightful and imperative to the overall structure of
the instructions over a time of testing. One user noticed a visual difference the screenshot of a
button in the instructions compared to the button on the actual website. They also commented
on the text being appropriately sized and easily visible. However, most users found that the
visuals were either outdated or inappropriately sized. But, yet, all of the users noted that the
visuals were effective. Another user noticed that certain steps, particularly step five, were
“confusing” and “too difficult” in that it appears to contain more than one step in itself. Step five
was also noted to lack detail in its description. This was also the case for the overall instruction
set, as they were seen as outdated, overly vague, or unhelpful. All of the aforementioned
suggestions and recommendations were adjusted accordingly, as well as minor details as per
the team’s discretion, in the overall improvement of the instructions.
Appendix A - Original Instructions

Navigating the United States Geological Survey current water data


Appendix B - Revised Instructions

Navigating the United States Geological Survey current water data

How do I access current conditions streamflow data?

Step 1

Use this link to find the current streamflow conditions: ​http://waterdata.usgs.gov/

Click the blue ​Current Conditions​ button.

You will get a map with colored dots that indicate current streamflow conditions (high, moderate,
or low streamflows) at stream gaging stations across the nation.
Step 2
You can click on your state or territory on the national map. For the sake of this tutorial, click
North Carolina​. A map will appear showing current streamflow conditions for North Carolina.

Step 3
Click on ​Statewide Streamflow Table​ link.

You will get a list of gaging stations, identified by name and number, where streamflow is
continually monitored. Also listed is currently available data from each station. These data sets
usually include gage height, streamflow, and a value for comparison--such as the average
streamflow for that day. ​How do I interpret gage heights and streamflows?

Step 4
Group the Streamflow Table by Hydrologic Unit to focus on the stations in your chosen state’s
watersheds. Click Go.

Note
A hydrologic unit is a water feature, such as a watershed or a river. We use the hydrologic unit
code (HUC), as our station number for our gaging stations.
Step 5
For the purpose of this tutorial, you can use the watershed with station number ​02137727​. Click
on the station number to get the data from that station.

You can find the station number for any watershed using our ​interactive map​.

Step 6
You can change the default 7 days to a time period of your choice. For the purpose of this
tutorial, you can use a ​begin date of May 4th, 2018​ and an ​end date of May 4th, 2019​.
Current condition streamflow data are available since October 1, 2007, and will include the
entire period of record starting in late 2012 or early 2013.

See ​system news​ for any announcements.


Step 7
For most stations, you will get a graph like the one below, which shows the discharge
(streamflow) data and historical data (median daily streamflows) for ​begin date of May 4th,
2018​ and an ​end date of May 4th, 2019 ​at the chosen station on the Catawba River in North
Carolina:

You might also like