Seeleaf is a small business manufacturing and selling detection wipes that identify poison ivy, poison oak, and poison sumac. The site is currently migrating from one e-commerce platform to another. During this transition, Seeleaf decided to assess its site’s copy for usability. Running usability tests with wireframe mockups, I identified areas of improvement within the site’s text, namely staying consistent with specialized phrases and clarifying common questions.
Seeleaf is currently migrating from one e-commerce site to another. They are a small business, who are looking to strengthen trust with existing and new customers. During this transition the company decided to evaluate its site content before relaunching. The company was unsure of its exact needs, and as a researcher, I began with a general evaluation of the site’s copy.
The objective was to assess the text of the Seeleaf website to evaluate its effectiveness, using best practices and usability testing.
Moderated usability testing was used to evaluate the text of Seeleaf’s site. Traditional usability testing gives participants tasks to perform while navigating a website. To test the site's copy, I wanted data that was not biased by the aesthetic look of the site, so the participants could focus their attention on the text alone.
To accomplish this, I used black and white, wireframe mockups of the site’s text during the sessions, as opposed to the live site. These mockups helped participants stay focused on the text, and what it is conveying, rather than what the visual style of the site is conveying.
As the mockups are rigid and do not include interactions, I was unable to give traditional scenario and tasks to testers. Rather, I went with a choose your own adventure approach, where I chose the adventure for them. I would let them know what they were doing on a page and have them explore the page with that mindset.
When viewing the company name and tagline:
“You can imagine these on the top of the website as you enter the site.”
When viewing the About Us page:
“Next, you want to learn a little about the company, Seeleaf.”
When seeing the product page:
“Now that you know a little about the company, you're thinking of purchasing the product and want to learn more about it.”
Once the mockup portion of the test concluded, I gave participants screenshots of the work in progress website to understand if the final product gave clarity to some questions that arose, and get some feedback on the visual elements of the copy (font, spacing, sizes, etc.)
To prepare for the usability sessions I decided on the most vital text on the website. I landed on testing the company name and tagline, about us page, product page, product instructions and return policy. I felt the product page, instructions and return policy were vital to an end user deciding whether or not to purchase the product from this site. As for the about us page, I wanted some text that would help me understand how participants perceive the company.
Additionally, I recruited 2 test participants and created a script to run participants through the sessions and pages. Additionally, I drafted black and white wireframe mockups of the text for the sessions.
Using affinity mapping I was able sort data from the test sessions. The sort helped to pin-point the largest and most frequently occurring issues with the site’s text.
There was one major theme that surfaced during analysis: consistency. The site’s copy lacked consistency across two vital areas, how to refer to the product and how to refer to what the product detects. Additionally, there was copy that at first glance appeared to be clear, but when participants had the time to focus on what was being conveyed, they were left with more questions than answers.
Seeleaf’s product was referred to using 5 different phrases on the product page.
The inconsistency left participants feeling unsure of what product they would receive, and also led to distrust of the company.
“it seems like it's a company that doesn't know what it's selling.” - participant
"Is it Seeleaf cloths? Seeleaf wipes? It's now back to just Seeleaf" - participant
I recommend sticking with a single term to reference the product. In order to stay consistent across the entire brand, I suggest choosing the wording seen on the packaging.
The phrase indicating what the product can detect was referred to in 4 different ways between the product and about us page.
Because the phrase is used multiple times within the same block of text, the discrepancy was noticeable. Participants again felt the lack of consistency was unprofessional and at times questioned what the product could be used with.
“Instead of saying poison ivy, poison oak, poison sumac all together, you can say ‘ivy oak and sumac’, unless that's misleading…?" - participant
“Now we have slashes for the poison, oak, sumac” - participant
I suggest choosing a consistent phase for poison ivy, poison oak, and poison sumac throughout the site.
Since this is a long, repetitive sentence that appears in many places on the site, I recommend further testing a couple different phrases to gauge which has the lowest cognitive load while still representing the true meaning of the phrase.
I recommend testing:
At first glance the About Us text felt strong and communicated a substantial amount of information. Upon asking participants to tell me about the company they realized the About Us page was mostly about the product, not the company. The information they would have expected to see was information about company’s history, background and mission statement.
“I have an understanding of the product itself, but I wouldn't say I have an understanding of the company." - participant
“Is this about us supposed to be about the company, or is this About Us supposed to be about the product?” - participant
I recommend adding personal details about the company history, why it was created, and a mission statement.
Seeleaf’s refund policy, when first reading it, seems straightforward, but the more participants read over the text, the more unsure they were.
Participants were already aware the product came in a 5 pack from having read the product page. They began to question how much money they would actually be refunded upon starting a return.
The issue was due to the term prorated.
“I don't get this. [prorated]” - participant
“How do they calculate the refund?” - participant
“[Customers are] going to get less than the full amount back? That doesn't seem like a full refund. It would not be what I expect for this product.” - participant
If possible, I would recommend a policy change, allowing customers a full refund for their purchase. As stated by a participant, they were surprised by the policy, feeling it reflected the company negatively.
If this is not possible, I recommend creating a refund chart explicitly stating the amount the customer will receive when sending back 1, 2, 3, or 4 of the remaining product in the product pack.
As participants read through the copy, a lot of questions arose around different topics, from how to dispose of the used product, who the items were safe for, and more explicit details about the lifespan of the product.
“Are they gonna come with some sort of disposable [thing], cause now you've got a contaminated item.” - participant
“Is there an expiration? what happens if it gets wet.” - participant
“Are they pet safe?” - participant
“What does it mean when it says [small spots]. How large are the spot before its fully contaminated?” - participant
Participants expressed wanting this information, but expecting it to be on an FAQ page, which the site does not currently have.
I recommend gathering all the FAQs from this session, and any direct correspondence with end users to create a FAQ page on the site.
As the Seeleaf site is currently under construction, I was unable to run participants through the same live pages they were shown during the test sessions. Once the site is finished being built, I would like to run a second usability session, running through the same pages.
Before updating the copy based on the recommendations made, I feel it would also be beneficial to meet with the product owners to create a stronger personality for the site's copy so they can talk more directly to their audience.
Seeleaf is a small business, attempting to reach a wider audience and make business easier for themselves by moving their site to a new e-commerce platform. I appreciate the effort they are making to freshen the site up for the customers, during this migration.
I feel confident the small fixes made to the site's copy will greatly strengthen the trust they have with existing customers and make a positive first impression on those new to the product. I look forward to continuing working with Seeleaf through their site relaunch.
.png){kind=small}