Is remote user testing better than on-site?
Tim RotoloRemote user testing is cheaper, faster, and more hands-off than on-site testing; does that make it the "fast food" of UX research? Or is there more to it?
You’re on a business trip in Oakland, CA. You've been working late in downtown and now you're looking for a place nearby to grab a late dinner. You decided to check Zomato to try and find somewhere to eat. (Don't begin searching yet).
It was hard to find the bart station. The collections not being able to be sorted was a bit of a bummer
Feedback from the owners would be nice
The flow was good, lots of bright photos
I like that you can sort by what you are looking for and i like the idea of collections
You're going on a vacation to Italy next month, and you want to learn some basic Italian for getting around while there. You decided to try Duolingo.
I felt like there could have been a little more of an instructional component to the lesson.
It would be cool if there were some feature that could allow two learners studying the same language to take lessons together. I imagine that their screens would be synced and they could go through lessons together and chat along the way.
Overall, the app was very intuitive to use and visually appealing. I also liked the option to connect with others.
Overall, the app seemed very helpful and easy to use. I feel like it makes learning a new language fun and almost like a game. It would be nice, however, if it contained more of an instructional portion.
Note to testers: During the transition period, you can freely log in & out of both systems
Remote user testing is cheaper, faster, and more hands-off than on-site testing; does that make it the "fast food" of UX research? Or is there more to it?