claude-skills-reference/product-team/ux-researcher-designer/references/usability-testing-frameworks.md

Usability Testing Frameworks

Reference for planning and conducting usability tests that produce actionable insights.

---

Table of Contents

• Testing Methods Overview
• Test Planning
• Task Design
• Moderation Techniques
• Analysis Framework
• Reporting Template

---

Testing Methods Overview

Method Selection Matrix

Method	When to Use	Participants	Time	Output
Moderated remote	Deep insights, complex flows	5-8	45-60 min	Rich qualitative
Unmoderated remote	Quick validation, simple tasks	10-20	15-20 min	Quantitative + video
In-person	Physical products, context matters	5-10	60-90 min	Very rich qualitative
Guerrilla	Quick feedback, public spaces	3-5	5-10 min	Rapid insights
A/B testing	Comparing two designs	100+	Varies	Statistical data

Participant Count Guidelines

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    FINDING USABILITY ISSUES                 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                             │
│  % Issues Found                                             │
│  100% ┤                          ●────●────●                │
│   90% ┤                    ●─────                           │
│   80% ┤              ●─────                                 │
│   75% ┤         ●────                 ← 5 users: 75-80%     │
│   50% ┤    ●────                                            │
│   25% ┤ ●──                                                 │
│    0% ┼────┬────┬────┬────┬────┬────                       │
│        1    2    3    4    5    6+   Users                  │
│                                                             │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Nielsen's Rule: 5 users find ~75-80% of usability issues

Goal	Participants	Reasoning
Find major issues	5	80% coverage, diminishing returns
Validate fix	3	Confirm specific issue resolved
Compare designs	8-10 per design	Need comparison data
Quantitative metrics	20+	Statistical significance

---

Test Planning

Research Questions

Transform vague goals into testable questions:

Vague Goal	Testable Question
"Is it easy to use?"	"Can users complete checkout in under 3 minutes?"
"Do users like it?"	"Will users choose Design A or B for this task?"
"Does it make sense?"	"Can users find the settings without hints?"

Test Plan Template

PROJECT: _______________
DATE: _______________
RESEARCHER: _______________

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
1. _______________
2. _______________
3. _______________

PARTICIPANTS:
• Target: [Persona or user type]
• Count: [Number]
• Recruitment: [Source]
• Incentive: [Amount/type]

METHOD:
• Type: [Moderated/Unmoderated/Remote/In-person]
• Duration: [Minutes per session]
• Environment: [Tool/Location]

TASKS:
1. [Task description + success criteria]
2. [Task description + success criteria]
3. [Task description + success criteria]

METRICS:
• Completion rate (target: __%)
• Time on task (target: __ min)
• Error rate (target: __%)
• Satisfaction (target: __/5)

SCHEDULE:
• Pilot: [Date]
• Sessions: [Date range]
• Analysis: [Date]
• Report: [Date]

Pilot Testing

Always pilot before real sessions:

• Run 1-2 test sessions with team members
• Check task clarity and timing
• Test recording/screen sharing
• Adjust based on pilot feedback

Pilot Checklist:

• Tasks understood without clarification
• Session fits in time slot
• Recording captures screen + audio
• Post-test questions make sense

---

Task Design

Good vs. Bad Tasks

Bad Task	Why Bad	Good Task
"Find the settings"	Leading	"Change your notification preferences"
"Use the dashboard"	Vague	"Find how many sales you made last month"
"Click the blue button"	Prescriptive	"Submit your order"
"Do you like this?"	Opinion-based	"Rate how easy it was (1-5)"

Task Construction Formula

SCENARIO + GOAL + SUCCESS CRITERIA

Scenario: Context that makes task realistic
Goal: What user needs to accomplish
Success: How we know they succeeded

Example:
"Imagine you're planning a trip to Paris next month. [SCENARIO]
Book a hotel for 3 nights in your budget. [GOAL]
You've succeeded when you see the confirmation page. [SUCCESS]"

Task Types

Type	Purpose	Example
Exploration	First impressions	"Look around and tell me what you think this does"
Specific	Core functionality	"Add item to cart and checkout"
Comparison	Design validation	"Which of these two menus would you use to..."
Stress	Edge cases	"What would you do if your payment failed?"

Task Difficulty Progression

Start easy, increase difficulty:

Task 1: Warm-up (easy, builds confidence)
Task 2: Core flow (main functionality)
Task 3: Secondary flow (important but less common)
Task 4: Edge case (stress test)
Task 5: Free exploration (open-ended)

---

Moderation Techniques

The Think-Aloud Protocol

Instruction Script: "As you work through the tasks, please think out loud. Tell me what you're looking at, what you're thinking, and what you're trying to do. There are no wrong answers - we're testing the design, not you."

Prompts When Silent:

• "What are you thinking right now?"
• "What do you expect to happen?"
• "What are you looking for?"
• "Tell me more about that"

Handling Common Situations

Situation	What to Say
User asks for help	"What would you do if I weren't here?"
User is stuck	"What are your options?" (wait 30 sec before hint)
User apologizes	"You're doing great. We're testing the design."
User goes off-task	"That's interesting. Let's come back to [task]."
User criticizes	"Tell me more about that." (neutral, don't defend)

Non-Leading Question Techniques

Leading (Don't)	Neutral (Do)
"Did you find that confusing?"	"How was that experience?"
"The search is over here"	"What do you think you should do?"
"Don't you think X is easier?"	"Which do you prefer and why?"
"Did you notice the tooltip?"	"What happened there?"

Post-Task Questions

After each task:

1. "How difficult was that?" (1-5 scale)
2. "What, if anything, was confusing?"
3. "What would you improve?"

After all tasks:

1. "What stood out to you?"
2. "What was the best/worst part?"
3. "Would you use this? Why/why not?"

---

Analysis Framework

Severity Rating Scale

Severity	Definition	Criteria
4 - Critical	Prevents task completion	User cannot proceed
3 - Major	Significant difficulty	User struggles, considers giving up
2 - Minor	Causes hesitation	User recovers independently
1 - Cosmetic	Noticed but not problematic	User comments but unaffected

Issue Documentation Template

ISSUE ID: ___
SEVERITY: [1-4]
FREQUENCY: [X/Y participants]

TASK: [Which task]
TIMESTAMP: [When in session]

OBSERVATION:
[What happened - factual description]

USER QUOTE:
"[Direct quote if available]"

HYPOTHESIS:
[Why this might be happening]

RECOMMENDATION:
[Proposed solution]

AFFECTED PERSONA:
[Which user types]

Pattern Recognition

Quantitative Signals:

• Task completion rate < 80%
• Time on task > 2x expected
• Error rate > 20%
• Satisfaction < 3/5

Qualitative Signals:

• Same confusion point across 3+ users
• Repeated verbal frustration
• Workaround attempts
• Feature requests during task

Analysis Matrix

┌─────────────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┐
│ Issue           │ Frequency │ Severity  │ Priority  │
├─────────────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────┤
│ Can't find X    │ 4/5       │ Critical  │ HIGH      │
│ Confusing label │ 3/5       │ Major     │ HIGH      │
│ Slow loading    │ 2/5       │ Minor     │ MEDIUM    │
│ Typo in text    │ 1/5       │ Cosmetic  │ LOW       │
└─────────────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┘

Priority = Frequency × Severity

---

Reporting Template

Executive Summary

USABILITY TEST REPORT
[Project Name] | [Date]

OVERVIEW
• Participants: [N] users matching [persona]
• Method: [Type of test]
• Tasks: [N] tasks covering [scope]

KEY FINDINGS
1. [Most critical issue + impact]
2. [Second issue]
3. [Third issue]

SUCCESS METRICS
• Completion rate: [X]% (target: Y%)
• Avg. time on task: [X] min (target: Y min)
• Satisfaction: [X]/5 (target: Y/5)

TOP RECOMMENDATIONS
1. [Highest priority fix]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]

Detailed Findings Section

FINDING 1: [Title]

Severity: [Critical/Major/Minor/Cosmetic]
Frequency: [X/Y participants]
Affected Tasks: [List]

What Happened:
[Description of the problem]

Evidence:
• P1: "[Quote]"
• P3: "[Quote]"
• [Video timestamp if available]

Impact:
[How this affects users and business]

Recommendation:
[Proposed solution with rationale]

Design Mockup:
[Optional: before/after if applicable]

Metrics Dashboard

TASK PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Task 1: [Name]
├─ Completion: ████████░░ 80%
├─ Avg. Time: 2:15 (target: 2:00)
├─ Errors: 1.2 avg
└─ Satisfaction: ★★★★☆ 4.2/5

Task 2: [Name]
├─ Completion: ██████░░░░ 60% ⚠️
├─ Avg. Time: 4:30 (target: 3:00) ⚠️
├─ Errors: 3.1 avg ⚠️
└─ Satisfaction: ★★★☆☆ 3.1/5

[Continue for all tasks]

---

Quick Reference

Session Checklist

Before Session:

• Test plan finalized
• Tasks written and piloted
• Recording set up and tested
• Consent form ready
• Prototype/product accessible
• Note-taking template ready

During Session:

• Consent obtained
• Think-aloud explained
• Recording started
• Tasks presented one at a time
• Post-task ratings collected
• Debrief questions asked
• Thanks and incentive

After Session:

• Notes organized
• Recording saved
• Initial impressions captured
• Issues logged

Common Metrics

Metric	Formula	Target
Completion rate	Successful / Total × 100	>80%
Time on task	Average seconds	<2x expected
Error rate	Errors / Attempts × 100	<15%
Task-level satisfaction	Average rating	>4/5
SUS score	Standard formula	>68
NPS	Promoters - Detractors	>0

---

See also: journey-mapping-guide.md for contextual research