Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
34 lines (27 loc) · 3.33 KB

2022-10-25_Accessibility_Testing.md

File metadata and controls

34 lines (27 loc) · 3.33 KB
Raw

Accessibility testing: Form building

2022-10-25 / Sprint 12

Aims

  • Test the task list: we have a new design to help users complete a form and make it live
  • Test question types: we have new designs for how users can select different answer types as well as the inclusion of radio buttons
  • Explore use of the preview pane by users with access needs
  • Understand more about what the experience of creating a form on GOV.UK Forms is like via a mobile device

Users

  • Members of the public with access needs
  • 6 users

Methodology

  • Usability Testing (Accessibility focus)

Key Headlines

  • Users with accessibility needs had a positive experience and there were consistently high SEQ scores across most tasks. There were similar comments made from those completing tasks on a mobile device. 
  • Users generally find it easy to navigate forwards and backwards although some users with cognitive and visual impairments would benefit from a ‘back to forms’ link being clearer or bigger.
  • Creating a form, creating single line questions and address questions were generally easy to complete.
  • The use of radio buttons is helpful for most users with visual impairments, although there were still some difficulties with some not clear that a list was being presented. 
  • There was a little difficulty selecting the right question type for a name, where it wasn’t clear whether this should be a single or multiple line question type. For other question types, such as number or address, this was much clearer. 
  • The preview pane remains a problem area with very few examples of users discovering and accessing it spontaneously. Common problems are: not noticing it/ not having sufficient stand out, mistaking it for banner advertising, inconsistency in layout, positioning issue and a visually recessive action button. Mobile device users generally did not find the preview pane below the save and add question buttons.
  • Generally, the guidance is highlighted as a real positive, especially for those with visual and cognitive impairments. Users claim it is clear, concise, informative and makes the experience easier.
  • Those with cognitive challenges felt the font size was too small and the grey text colour was not visually prominent enough which made it hard to read. Some felt there was too much text in certain sections (e.g. declaration/ privacy notice) which had a negative impact on users’ concentration.
  • The use of examples is highly beneficial to users. Not only does it reinforce the guidance but users can use copy and paste to reduce the physical fatigue of writing it out in full.
  • The Task List does a good job at providing an overview of all the steps in the process which helps manage expectations. However, many felt ‘stuck’ when they couldn’t move the ‘edit & create question’ task to ‘complete’ and this dampened users sense of progression. 
  • The tasks: adding a declaration, adding email confirmation and adding a privacy notice were completed with surprising ease considering participants weren’t form creators. This was credited to the guidance being clear although there are opportunities to optimise the language.

Supporting Evidence