An Evidence-Based Design Analysis of Websites

Template for Evidence-Based Design - Assignment 2–

Synthesizing the Literature Evidence

Instructions: Leave this part off the report. It is here to help you format your report by giving instructions.

In this assignment, you are asked to review and synthesize the relevant evidence from the literature for each of the website design features listed. The format you use should reflect the template provide in the in lesson 2 (where is presented the guidelines, the desfinitions/descriptions/evidence/ and proposed guidelines). Be sure to include any relevant evidence from the literature to support the guideline (i.e., relevant citations).

Here are the issues to examine:

· Product information: This is the extent to which the website provides adequate information for the viewer about an individual product. Sometimes it is presented along with the product presentation and in other instances, it is provided through a link (such as ‘Product Details’ or ‘Specifications’).

· Customer Reviews: The issue is whether it makes sense to allows consumers to post review comments on the product and, if so, what is the most appropriate way.

· The Use of Pop-ups: Pop-ups are new windows that appear on a website page that were NOT executed by the user. They are often ads unrelated to the website, but on retail websites, they are usually related (such as an offer of coupons). The major issue is whether these are effective and, if so, how they should be implemented (e.g., when the pop-up should appear). A related issue is the cancel function and where the button should be located. Some websites use “shame” options such as “No thanks, I don’t want to save money”. The issues to consider with shame options is whether they are effective (not only in terms of clicks, but users attitudes towards them). It is important to evaluate the evidence as it relates to RETAILERS.

· Contact Information: The issue is how and where to place contact information.

· Miscellaneous: Any other issues that you see in the website that you think should be addressed. Some of these may become evident during your literature search on other issues.

Note: The guidelines are to be evaluated for the desktop version of the website, not the mobile version.

At the conclusion of the synthesis, you are asked to prepare a 1-2 summary that includes your analysis of the degree to which the literature has provided strong evidence for the issues being examined. Included in the analysis should be a discussion of why there is (or is not) a consensus of evidence. If there is little agreement, try to provide an explanation. Conversely, if the evidence is strong, this would suggest that the guideline is settle and should generally be accepted.

Things to Consider when Completing the Analysis

1. Strength of evidence

Evidence comes in many different forms and it is important to distinguish among them to understand the extent to which they are valid. Here are some useful considerations, ranked from weakest to strongest:

· Personal opinion: This is the weakest form of evidence unless you can demonstrate that you have credentials as an ‘expert’ in this area. If you are not an expert, this should be avoided as it conveys a lack of professional analysis. To help ensure that you avoid this mistake, think as an analyst and NOT as a respondent to a questionnaire. In other words, avoid giving a direct opinion unless it can be verified by other, more credible, evidence. A sign of personal opinion is the use of first person (e.g., I think the website should….) Avoid first person (or minimize it) as it is generally not acceptable in most professional writing.

· Personal discussions with others: Citing a professor or someone else that you may have talked with (or listened to) is fairly weak evidence unless that person provided valid background evidence for their opinion (that background evidence would be a published report of some type). For example, it is not appropriate to state that you learned something in a class and that forms the basis for the evidence. This is because the reader may have no idea what that class was about (or its validity). Stating that the person has a Ph.D., is a professor, or worked in the industry is not very strong evidence. Hence, the use of personal discussions with others should be avoided.

· Industry Analysts (published): Industry analysts commonly provide recommendations on the appropriate actions to take in a given situation. Oftentimes, this is simply presented as their professional opinion. Unlike the personal discussions, however, these recommendations are published and can be verified as such. That helps distinguish the strength of this evidence from the personal discussions. Occasionally, these recommendations may be presented along with results from a proprietary study conducted by their organization (or they are reporting on results from another study). In doing so, the strength of the evidence increases. But, unless the method is described in detail (or is available for review), this evidence is less strong. Still, this can be important evidence in the absence of stronger support. Be sure to provide context. In other words, if it is an analysts opinion, state it as such and don’t imply that it is the result of empirical evidence.

· Professional Reports (published): In some cases, a media report will present evidence from a study. Typically, an industry observer will describe the study and its importance. This is getting towards the most credible evidence. This is a common source of evidence and is credible when placed in perspective. The evidence should be presented as an industry report. Care should be taken to ensure that the source is a bona fide industry reporter/analyst. Forums where most anyone can post their opinions is NOT an acceptable source of evidence.

· Scientific Reports: This is the strongest form of evidence, although it may be the least available. For many website issues, there simply is not enough published research in scientific journals to provide evidence to support a guideline.

Important note: The last two forms of evidence are the strongest and should form the basis for the evidence.

2. Citing the evidence

When reference the evidence in your report, it is important to provide a source to confirm the source of the statement.

There are numerous citation styles. A common one for the body of the text is to include the last name and year of the publication. (e.g., Jones, 2015). It is not enough to simply use the name. The full reference SHOULD NOT be placed in the body of the text; rather, it should be included in the reference section located in the conclusion of the report. The following are illustrative examples of incorrect and correct presentation of citing evidence within the text.

INCORRECT (hypothetical example) :

Barbara Kahn, in her recent article in the Journal of Marketing titled, Five Ways to Make your Website More Effective, published in 2017, argued on page 3 of the article that it is important to ensure that the brand logo be placed at the top fold, preferably on the left side. Others, including David Johnson, an industry analyst for Website Consulting, told a group of practitioners at a 2016 conference in Ontario Canada the same thing.

CORRECT (hypothetical example) :

Industry analysts have recommended that the brand logo be located at the top fold, preferably on the left side (Johnson, 2016; Kahn, 2017)

Reference Style:

In the reference section, there are numerous styles, but APA is preferred, but not mandatory. Just make sure it is an established style, not your own.

Here is a site to help with the formatting: