B2C - adaptive web - review form
B2C | web, adaptive mobile
Sitejabber was puzzled as to why most reviewers only review once. To find out the root cause, we spoke to users to understand their motivation when writing reviews and we conducted usability testing to find issue with the existing review page.
The research takeaways led to a review page redesign. The main redesign includes a progressive disclosure technique to reduce cognitive workload and an indicator to promote sharing more about their shopping experience.
Prototypes of these concepts were created for validation. 5/5 users interviewed with the desktop prototype said the new interaction design made the review easy to fill out and 4/5 users felt the new "review strength" indicator encouraged them to share more information.
Sitejabber is a review platform for consumers to learn about ecommerce businesses
Lead Product Designer
UX Research, UI/UX, Information Architecture, Interaction Design, Prototyping in 7 weeks
Based on data gathered from Google Analytics, only 7% of reviews are from repeated reviewers.
Because Sitejabber is an user-generated content (UGC) site, having reviewers consistently write reviews is crucial to the business's growth. These reviews not only help generate traffic on the consumer side but also attract businesses to Sitejabber for analytics features and data insights.
Redesigning the review page was the scope proposed by the client. Although we found through research that fake reviews to be the underlying issue, shifting the project objective will extend the project timeline and need a budget increase. Ultimately, it was decided to proceed with exploring redesign options.
Working with existing structure
Since there are invaluable data collected with the 5 rating categories (service, value, shipping, returns, quality), modifying this was out of question.
2 existing Sitejabber, 3 first time users were interviewed for feedback on the existing review page. They were given two shopping experience scenarios (1 positive and 1 negative) and asked to openly discuss how they were fill out the form.
After synthesizing, the key usability issues were:
Yelp is the top review platform for restaurants; Tripadvisor for travel destinations; Amazon for most products in the world. The team looked into these websites to find design patterns that contribute to their user experience:
Different design patterns were explored to determine how the page can be redesigned to improve the user experience.
A new layout to reduce user's cognitive load
clarify each category rating with helper text and a friendly, direct tone
Revew strength feature as a motivator
A consistent usability issue found during testing was that users did not notice the "more about business" section. 0/5 tested users saw this section.
However, after being prompted to the section, users commented that these additional ratings and questions were easy to fill out and said it was "helpful for consumers" and "can provide a lot more info to help the business out".
Several ideas were explored using content in the section.
Client explained that SiteJabber is intended to be a business focused (customer service, shipping, etc.) review site rather than a product focused one.
SiteJabber has a lot of data around the 5 categories system and want to avoid restructuring the existing database.
Both designs were created as clickable prototypes and shown to users. 5/5 users preferred the progressive disclosure pattern over the carousel. Users stated that they preferred seeing all category ratings immediately vs needing to click in order to see the rest.
"Write a Review" page - "About Business" expanded section
The "Zeigarnik Effect" concept is explored in attempt to motivate users to share details on their experience with an online business. If users consciously see something gauging their review's completeness, in theory, users are more motivated to complete it fully.
Why we pivoted from this design:
Numerical scale is not the best metric for reviews.
Why we pivoted from this design:
One user indicated she felt "judged" during concept validation.
Why this design is the winner:
The linear progress bar doesn't include text description, however it's clear as user progresses.
The final strength meter includes supporting copy intermediately to further encourage users to add more information to their review.
To verify the impact of the concepts, 10 users were invited to give feedback to the designs. 5 users were interviewed with 2 desktop prototypes and 5 with 2 mobile prototypes. Here are a summary of the results: *mobile version results not included
"More about business" category rating section
Create a review strength meter to motivate users
0/5 users clicked on the "more about business" section until being asked. All users were confused about categories & questions
5/5 users interviewed with desktop version liked the progressive layout and indicated the categories & questions were clear and useful
4/5 desktop users thought the review strength was encouraging while writing the review
Pinpointing which design improvements made most impact was a challenge
From the business perspective, knowing how easy a feature is to implement versus its impact is important because this information can be used to prioritize what needs to get done.
The final design proposed includes multiple improvements in copy, layout, and even adding a new concept (review strength). Although users feedback for the design was positive, it's unclear how the improvements rank based on impact.
Therefore, it will be more telling if we did more rounds of A/B testing comparing the original design versus the improvments individually.
If I can do it again with a bigger budget and more time...
I would do extensive research around combating fake reviews. The reason is because I strongly believe the most one-time reviewers are fake reviewers. Therefore, I would find design patterns that increase friction for fakers (user or purchase verification) or spend time to develop designs that address this issue.
Secondly, recruiting existing SiteJabber reviewers was a challenge. For this iteration, we were only able to recruit 2 existing SiteJabber reviewers. If we have more time and budget...