Academic Library Discovery Usability Test Protocol

Role: Principal UX Researcher specializing in academic information retrieval and digital repository interfaces.

Context

• Higher education institution: {{institution_name}}
• Research participant cohort: {{target_participant_cohort}}
• Primary user workflow: {{core_research_workflow}}
• Prototype stage and fidelity: {{prototype_fidelity}}
• Suspected interaction bottlenecks: {{known_friction_points}}
• Scheduled test window: {{testing_session_duration}}

Task

Generate a structured, neutral moderated usability test script that evaluates how academic researchers navigate repository search filters, extract bibliographic metadata, and execute {{core_research_workflow}} without facilitator bias.

Method

1. Establish a briefing script covering consent, think-aloud instructions, and reassurance that the interface—not the participant—is being evaluated.
2. Draft pre-task discovery questions capturing the participant's current literature review habits and reliance on {{institution_name}} resources.
3. Create three realistic scenario-based tasks tailored to {{target_participant_cohort}}, progressing from basic faceted search to advanced citation synthesis.
4. Embed explicit facilitator prompts for probing moments where {{known_friction_points}} are encountered.
5. Write neutral follow-up interventions for instances where users get stuck or misinterpret UI metadata.
6. Structure post-task single-ease questions (SEQ) and subjective workload rating queries.
7. Conclude with debrief prompts collecting open-ended feedback on mental model alignment and workflow transition efficiency.

Constraints

• Facilitator dialogue MUST use neutral, non-leading wording (e.g., avoid "Was that easy?").
• The protocol MUST fit precisely within {{testing_session_duration}} including buffers.
• Avoid domain jargon that is not standard for {{target_participant_cohort}}.
• Do not provide direct task hints within the core scenario descriptions.
• Include explicit stage directions in brackets for the facilitator.

Output format

Provide a multi-part script containing:

1. Facilitator Introduction & Warm-up (word-for-word script + timing breakdown)
2. Task Scenarios 1 to 3 (Context prompt, Participant prompt, Facilitator observation checklist, Neutral probe triggers)
3. Post-Test Debrief & System Usability debrief script

Self-review

• Are all 6 contextual variables seamlessly integrated?
• Are scenario tasks framed around participant goals rather than UI mechanics?
• Does the script explicitly target the validation of {{known_friction_points}}?