Paul Chae

ES4692
Introduction
Often times rocks, branches or other debris crash into our windshield saving our lives but
leaving a crack or chip in the windshield. To maintain the integrity and safety of the windshield I
have design a set of instructions targeted at anyone with little to a lot previous experience. In
this set of instructions I try to simplify every step and explain some theory behind each step to
help the user understand why the step is necessary. Anyone who is willing to do a little hands on
work and follow the given instructions can save hundreds in windshield replacement and more
importantly maintain the safety of the windshield.
Objective
The objective of my user test was to see the effectiveness of my instructions. By using the
results from the three different participants of different expertise level I will identify how to make
my instructions more clear and efficient for my audience.
Method
The three test readers I chose varied in the amount of previous hands on car maintenance
experience they possessed. One of the readers had little to no experience, the second reader
had some experience and the third reader had a lot of previous experience. The varying amount
of previous experience the readers had helps me gauge how clear my communications are to
both experts and novices. The combinations I received from my results allowed me to decipher
which steps of the instructions were confusing. If the expert understood the instruction but the
amateur did not, that would mean the instruction needs to be broken down in a simpler
explanation. However, if neither the expert nor amateur did not understand the instruction that
would mean the entire instruction needs to be reexamined and approached differently.
The user test I used to conduct my research was the understandability test. I chose the
understandability test because it allows you to combine parts of both the performance test and
location test; testing their understanding of specifics of the draft. I chose to ask all my questions
in terms of multiple choice to set a standard of answers, this way it is easier to compare
answers between users if there is a standardized set of answers that has a verifying hierarchy
of conclusions. I simply asked my users to read through the instructions entirely. When they had
completely read the instructions I gave them the user test which consisted of 10 multiple choice
questions. During the procedure, I did not answer any questions or simplify any instructions;
simply allowed the users to simulate a real test and gathered the final results. With these
results, I compared the answers among the three users; using the multiple choice method
helped simplify the conclusion of the results as there was a standardized answer bank that
allowed for easy comparisons.
Results/Discussion

Paul Chae
ES4692

Paul Chae
ES4692

Results

Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
Question 6
Question 7
Question 8
Question 9
Question 10

Correct Answer
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
A
B
D
FALSE
B
B
B

User 1 (Amateur)
TRUE
FALSE
TRUE
D
B
D
TRUE
B
B
B

User 2 (Novice)
FALSE
FALSE
TRUE
A
B
D
FALSE
B
B
B

User 3 (Expert)
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
D
B
D
FALSE
B
B
B

After the completion of the tests by the users, I put the results of the user test into this table so I
can easily compare the results. As shown in the table, the answers highlighted in red are
incorrect; when there are two incorrect answers on the same question between two users there
is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Question 3, which asked how to cure the resin clearly was not effectively communicated to
users 1 and users 2. In the instructions, I mentioned that the main method of curing the resin is
to use the sun; however, I mentioned as a side note that if the sun is not available UV light can
be used. I have come to the conclusion that I need to emphasize more that using a UV light is
just as a viable option as using the sun. This is extremely important to communicate as the sun
is not always available, especially during the weather or if people are completing this repair
inside a garage.
Question 4, which asked which of the types of cracks is most dangerous was answered
incorrectly by both users 1 and users 3. The fact that this question was answers incorrectly by
both users and that the expert of the users answered incorrectly is a big concern. In the article, I
emphasized the three different types of cracks by showing pictures; however, I clearly stated

Paul Chae
ES4692
that the amount of danger increases as you go down the labelled pictures. I will include in the
revision of my article, under each picture the severity of the crack with labels: least severe,
medium severe, most severe. I hope that this will completely eliminate the confusion as this is a
very important step and information that I wanted to communicate to the users; this could result
in the further cracking of the crack during the repair process.
The trends of the user test seem to be as predicted, with the amateur having the most amount
of trouble and the expert having the least. However, because this is targeted at an audience of
all expertise levels, I need to make some adjustments to the article to able to communicate
more efficiently and simply to amateurs to stop them from making mistakes. There are no
questions in which all three users answered incorrectly which is a good sign of good
communication.
After each user took the user test, I had a brief discussion with each of them which really helped
inform me on the difficulties the users had about the instructions. They all mentioned that visual
aids were the best and easiest way to understand a step. The images I used to describe the
different types of cracks were effective in helping the users understand the crack they had to fix
and how to adjust their repair accordingly. The use of bullet points were more effective than the
use of whole sentences, the users mentioned that they were short and simple which helped
know the step by step instructions and tasks that need to completed. This is an area in which I
will revise, I believe that my use of paragraphs and full sentences was a little long. I will use
bullet points more often, combined with visual aids which will help the users visualize the whole
task. The users said that they would have preferred if I broke up the bigger, longer steps into
smaller shorter steps. They said that this would have helped condense each step and making
each task a little simpler to follow.
Conclusion
Overall I learned that my instructions were relatively easy to follow and that the test results were
as I hypothesized with the amateur having the most difficulty and the expert having the least.
However, because I am targeting this article at everyone, especially the amateurs I am going to
take the feedback I received from this user test and apply some revisions to my instructions to
help simplify the instructions and communicate more efficiently with the users. The specific
revisions I plan to make are adding even more visuals, as they are the most effective way to
communicate with readers. Decrease the amount of paragraphs used and increase the amount
of bullet points, explaining the step by step instructions. Break up the longer instructions into
smaller and shorter instructions simplifying the whole process and allowing the amateur users to
follow along.

Paul Chae
ES4692

Appendix

Paul Chae
ES4692

Paul Chae
ES4692

Paul Chae
ES4692