Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities

Hi Josh

This is a great thread. I think an issue paper on user testing for COGA use groups would be a good idea. Not having any user testing with people with cognitive disabilities might have the result that they will never have fully useable services. 


I have not done a lot of testing, but a technique I have used is to avoid any language that suggests the user fails. For example, "can you see how to buy shoes" becomes "did the designer make it clear how to buy shoes". In other words, the implication is the design is at fault not the user. Limiting the amount of fail question to two, however they have been rephrased, is probably a good idea as well. I would always end with asking them to do tasks they can manage.


Of course, informed consent is always a requirement.


All the best
Lisa














---- On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:14:52 +0300 <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote ---- 

 [Chair hat off]
  
 In a previous thread the issue of user testing with people with cognitive impairments has been brought up. I thought this could be a good time to 
 share some of my own thoughts in this area. As some of you may know, I ran a user testing lab in the National Council for the Blind of Ireland for around 10 years. During that time I ran user tests with a wide range of users, not just those who are blind/VIP. In that time I did a small amount of testing with people with cognitive impairments, mental health issues etc. I found this a difficult group to test with due to my own concern about the ethics of doing so properly.
  
 One very strong reservation I have about this whole area is simple. Does the user have the ability the objectively separate the tasks they are  asked to perform in a test (and the natural success/failure when trying to completing these tasks) from their overall 'sense of self'? What I mean is that will the user be able to realise that their actions are being objectively observed without any 'judgement' on their performance?
  
  I would hate to think that a user would come away from a user test, where many tasks were failed (which is great usability information) but feeling worse about themselves, or as if _they_ were some kind of failure. In short, I think user testing is a bit of a performance, within an utterly contrived environment. Some people take to this well, others don't.
  
 This is a very thorny issue but one I want to flag. I don't think testing should take place at all without a strong framework about how to deal with these sensitive situations. Sometimes you may have to make a call not to test, if it isn't in the best interest of the user test participant, even if they may be a perfect candidate for 'rich data'. I've made this call not to test in the past, and my overall take away was that I am largely uncomfortable doing this kind of testing, unless I'm sure it is in the participants best interest, separately from whatever the secondary need of a project/client is.
  
 Thoughts?
  
 Josh