As part of the Activities Filter Pattern Redesign Project, I planned and conducted a user study on two filter pattern concepts to evaluate them in terms of comprehension, usability, and utility I created a web prototype utilizing real activity data and the new activity categorizations in order to allow participants to actually filter and browse the full set of 471 activities we sell in Las Vegas.

I began by creating a series of metrics which we would use to evaluate the filter pattern concepts. These metrics were:

• Comprehension
• Do users notice and recognize that filters are on the page?
• Do users understand how to interact with filters?
• What do users expect to happen when they interact with different aspects of the filters (categories and subcategories)?
• Usability
• Are there any general usability issues with either pattern?
• Are touch targets big enough?
• Can users successfully interact with the filters?
• Utility
• Does the pattern help users quickly get a sense for the types of activities offered in a destination?
• Does the pattern allow users to quickly narrow down to a set of activities or specific activities?

Next, I created a study protocol which would enable me to evaluate the concepts on these metrics. I utilized the UserTesting.com Live Conversations platform with 10 participants for 30 minute sessions each. Each participant ahd to have an upcoming trip planned in the next month, had to have booked travel online in the past year, andhad to own and regularly use a mobile device. I had participants use mobile web prototypes I had built using real activity data for the Las Vegas market.

I set up the study with the following scenario:

You’ve just landed in Las Vegas and checked into your hotel, now you’re looking for something fun to do in the next day or two while you’re on your trip.

This scenario was designed to facilitate the open browsing use case for filters, where a traveler is just exploring what is available, and is using filters as a shorthand for the breadth of what is available.

Next, I followed up with a second scenario, which would help gauge how well the filters worked for the use case of a traveler trying to sift through all the activities to find something they already knew existed (or thought must exist):

Your friend mentioned that they really liked the Madame Tussaud wax museum last time they were in Vegas. You want to learn more about that activity.

I had each participant use both variants for each scenario, swapping the order of the variants with each subsequent participant. I ended each session with some general questions about the different variants .

Through this study, I found that people use filters for three main tasks:

• To quickly get a sense of the types of activities offered in a destination by reading names of filters provided
• To narrow to a type of activity to compare
• To find a specific activity

Overall, although there were a few minor usability issues which could be addressed, I found that one of the variants did a better job at helping our users, because 1) it helped participants quickly get a sense for the types of activities offered in a destination, and 2) it allowed participants to quickly narrow down to a set of activities or specific activities better than the other variant.

After this study, I worked on making further iterations and refinements to the winning variant in preparation for building it.

Through planning and conducting this study, I further polished my evaluative research skills. I also got practice disseminating research findings in different venues to different audiences, from the team working on the project, to the UX team as a whole. I used this project as a chance to further hone my skills at translating research findings into actionable design implications, further bridging the gap between research and design.

Study Protocol
Findings Report