Hello,
My thoughts on the survey:
1) GENDER
> If it is really-really necessary to ask…
I think it makes sense to ask for gender and age – if your survey only
reaches male users aged 20-30 you want to know, as results will apply to
this group then, but possibly not generalize well to other parts of the
user community.
> discouraging for non-binary people
Indeed – I would suggest the following question:
My gender is…
- Female
- Male
- Non-binary
- Prefer to self-define: _________
"other" is not considered good practice – needing to label oneself as
belonging to what is marked as residual category.
An interesting and and hands-on overview of gender questions in survey
can be found in Spiel at.al, 2019, acm interactions [1] though their
suggested method might be a bit hard to analyze.
2) AGE
Stopping at "over 55"seems pretty young for an upper end. Quite some
people who are in their mid-60s today will have used computers when they
were 20 or so in case they went to university.
I recently did research in a relatively young community but "over 55"
would have been the largest group, as the whole tail of the distribution
would get in there, so just extend the scale.
4) FREQUENCY
I agree with Csongor here: I would suggest to ask for "once a month",
"weekly" etc. here
An overview of these question types is at
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/measuring-behavioral-frequency/
13) SUS
In general, I would not change the wording or scale except we know that
it is OK to do. Many changes one can and can not do to the SUS are
researched.
The positive/negative reversal was researched and it turned out that you
can, or rather should, use an all-positive version: "Researchers who
do not have a current investment in the standard SUS can
use the all positive version with confidence because
respondents are less likely to make mistakes when responding,
researchers are less likely to make errors in coding, and the scores
will be similar to the standard SUS" Sauro, Lewis "When Designing
Usability Questionnaires, Does It Hurt to Be Positive?"
Another change that is supported by data is replacing "cumbersome" with
"awkward": James R. Lewis, Jeff Sauro: The Factor Structure of the
System Usability Scale, 2009
– Jan
[1] "How to do better with gender on surveys: a guide for HCI
researchers"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334073420_How_to_do_better_with_gender_on_surveys_a_guide_for_HCI_researchers
Am 06.07.2021 um 16:24 schrieb Csongor Halmai:
Hi All,
I wrote my response before reading the response of others and there is
a little bit of overlapping. Sorry for that.
Here are my thoughts.
1.
I don't think the first question helps too much about the future of
the LO. It is very discouraging for non-binary people. If it is
really-really necessary to ask, let's put it to the end of the list.
But the best would be to drop this question completely.
Similarly, the age also should be asked only at the end of the survey.
2.
A much more relevant question would be how long the person has been
using computers. Are you 30 and started at the age of 10, or are you
25 who started at 24? 30-10=20 is much more than 25-24=1.
3.
Instead of asking the age with non-continuous intervals, a much
easier-to-grasp question would be "which year you were born in?".
- 1966 or before
- 1967-1976
- 1977-...
This is easier than expecting them to decide if 34.5 belongs to the
25-34 or 35-44 group.
Here above I just converted the age limits to years but round year
numbers are probably even better:
- before 1960
- 1960-1969
- 1970-1979
- 1980-1989
- 1990-1999
- 2000-2009
- 2010 or later
4.
The optional answer for the usage frequency are very hard to
understand. Do I use LO Calc "All the time" if I use it every time
when I need it, two times a year? Instead of these soft categories, I
would be more exact:
- less than once in a year
- a couple of times in a year
- a couple of times in a month
- cca once a week
- almost every day
- several hours each workday (at least 4 days a week)
5.
The answers for Q7 (What is the size of your typical LibreOffice Calc
dataset?) will be very hard to process. Instead of this opened
question, I wold ask something like this:
- How many sheets you normally use in a Calc spreadsheet? Categories:
always 1, 1-3, 2-5, more
- How many rows do you use in a Spreadsheet? Categories: <50, 50-500,
500-5000, 5k-50k, more
- How many columns do you use in a Spreadsheet? Categories: <10,
10-20, 20-50, more
6.
The row labels "Select 6 as youranswer choice" and "Select "No Answer"
asyour answer choice" for Q9 seem to be a mistake.
7.
Typo: "Liner and Non-Linear Solvers" => "Linear and Non-Linear Solvers"
8.
"Please select "No Answer" if you are not familiar with a particular
feature."
There is no "No Answer" column.
9.
For Q13, the row labels could be simplified if the introduction would
be rephrased.
Instead of
"Please choose the appropriate response for each item"
I would write
"To what extent do you agree with the following statements"
After this, the row labels can be simpler:
"I think that I would like to use LibreOfficeCalc frequently.
=>
"I would like to use LibreOffice Calc more frequently."
10.
It's hard to switch between positive and negative statements. Say, if
I love LO Calc then sometimes I need to tick the leftmost circle,
sometimes the rightmost one. This is a bit hard.
It would be better to rephrase the negative statements to positive
ones. For example:
"I think that I would need the support of atechnical person to be able
to useLibreOffice Calc."
=>
"I can use LO Calc without the support of a technical person."
In this case it is more visible. If all the ticks are on the right
side then everything is good.
11.
After rephrasing the second statement "I find LibreOffice Calc
unnecessarily complex", we get the third one: "LibreOffice Calc is
easy to use". I would remove the second one and keep just the third
one. Why would we ask the same thing twice?
12.
Probably this is just a draft-draft version but the final version
should be typographically perfect. It would be a big shame for a
Document Company to share a PDF in which the cell content doesn't fit
into the cells. Example: "1 -Not Important at All" in Q9.
These were just a rough list I could put together quickly but I am
sure there would be a lot more things to change after trying to
actually answer the survey and then evaluating it too. Therefore, I
suggest making these changes, ask 10 people to answer it and then try
to evaluate it. Probably we will see that they answer the questions in
a way we cannot interpret, something it not clear, something is hard
to process.
Otherwise, this is a very promising survey.
Cheers,
Csongor
On 1/07/2021 02:35, Heiko Tietze wrote:
First reply from Stuart (per direct mail):
"Two confusing entries on page 5 of the draft survey:
Select 6 as your answer choice Select "No Answer" as your answer choice
I think they need to go to have valid results (and force respondents
to answer each question)."
Yes, the 'Select "No Answer" as your answer' choice slipped
accidentally in.
Also the item 'Select 6 as your answer choice'.
Second from Kompilainnen (on Telegram):
* Q1: Drop question about gender (answer has no value for the results)
* Q3: Add description like 'Basic - typing data, simple functions
like SUM only', 'Intermediate - Basic + use Conditional formatting,
Charts, more functions, like VLOOKUP, AVERAGE, SUMPRODUCT, etc', and
'Advanced - Intermediate + use many different functions, Pivot
Table, write some macro, create work templates, etc'
* Q4: same here, 'Never - 1 time per month - 1 time per week - 1
time per day - It's my main work tool'
* Q7: doubt this result in data that can be evaluated; would rather
ask both number of cells and size in two questions
* Q8: could benefit from a link to
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Calc_Functions/List_of_Functions/en
I agree with removing Q1, don't see why a gender should have an
impact on Calc usage. But would keep the question a bit vague on Q3
and 4. Also looking rather forward to analyze Q7, the results from
the Draw survey on "what size does your document have in average"
[1,2] shows the different view on this topic. Surely, it's still open
to challenge.
[1]
https://design.blog.documentfoundation.org/2016/04/01/the-many-faced-god-part-1-how-libreoffice-draw-is-being-utilized/
[2]
https://design.blog.documentfoundation.org/2016/04/01/the-many-faced-god-part-2-how-libreoffice-draw-is-expected-to-evolve/
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: design+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.