UX: receive feedback from pilot research sessions, iterate prototype

[wesrowe]

Description

Acceptance Criteria

• [x] Attend pilot research sessions
• [x] Participate in debrief
• [x] Revise prototype based on pilots

Team

Please check the team(s) that will do this work.

• [ ] CMS Team
• [x] Public Websites
• [ ] Facilities
• [ ] User support

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood Here's what I recommend fixing in the prototype when you get back from PTO:

1. Higher placement of the "Review the information you entered" link on the review screen in both present and past flows. I recommend putting the link just below the breadcrumb (because it's navigation), but you thought maybe just above the "Select your 2022 household income range" header.
2. (new!) Fix typos that I noticed on the Past flow results page:
   • Some of the salary ranges overlap. Need to change two of the endpoints so they're all unique.
   • (super minor, but if you're editing the design anyway) There's an extra space in the "how to estimate your income for this tool" accordion after "for a spouse or child".

Thanks! I'll check it out when I return from PTO on April 3.

[jilladams]

@thejordanwood let's put this ticket in PO Review when you're done, so @cindymerrill can review after her PTO to confirm the changes.

[cindymerrill]

I added myself as an assignee so I'll find out when it gets to PO Review

[wesrowe]

@thejordanwood, after another round of SME confusion, @cindymerrill and I decided to put the pension, A&A and Housebound questions back into the prototype. This is so that we'll have Veteran feedback on them in case we end up needing them (which is still an open question). I'll brief you upon your return.

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood This will also require changes to the "Intro" and "Review info entered" screens. When I get back on Monday April 3, I'll review all of your prototype revisions so we can be ready for usability testing as scheduled for Wednesday April 5.

[cindymerrill]

@wesrowe noted that the 3 new question screens (pension, Aid & Attendance, and Housebound) need to be asked in the past tense like we do for zip code and # of dependents because it's about the previous year. @thejordanwood

[thejordanwood]

Update 3/28

Making these updates to the prototype and will review with Wes and Cindy before usability testing starts on 4/5. Will close this ticket once review is complete.

[wesrowe]

New prototype link.

My notes, @thejordanwood:

Present year flow:

• [x] Pension question is past tense (correctly) but responses are present tense
• [x] Same tense issue for HB and A&A questions
• [x] Make the pension answer Yes so that A&A and HB make sense
  • [x] radio button selected
  • [ ] response in review screen

Past year flow

• [x] same tense issues in responses
• [x] also make Pension answer Yes (radio & review)
• [x] copy on past-flow results screen – last sentence says "We'll tell you how income limits may affect you." It crossed my mind that this could be past tense, "... may have affected you in 2021." @cindymerrill could weigh in on that one.
• [x] Flow error: I clicked "Continue" on the past-flow year-picker screen, and it took me back to the 2023 results screen. (only happens when year field is blank I think)

General

• [x] Most of the Continue buttons let me skip filling in the value/answering the question. I just noticed that one didn't, I think it was the A&A or HB quesiton in past limits flow – it forced me to enter value first. Not a big deal, I think either works and consistency is not our #1 priority. Or was it meant to make it easier to fast-forward after editing a value?
• [ ]

[thejordanwood]

@wesrowe Thanks for being a second set of eyes on this! Most of these edits have been made. I'm going to wait until Cindy gets back to ask her about the past tense on the past-flow results screen.

About being able to skip answering questions, I did that for this prototype as a way to fast forward through the flow if necessary. We can determine if this makes sense to do once this is in development.

[thejordanwood]

@wesrowe We changed the last line to past tense on the past-flow results screen.

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood The word "got" sounds too informal to me in phrases such as "Whether you got certain VA pension benefits last year" and "Yes, I got VA pension benefits". Replacing "got" with the word "received" sounds better to me, though I'm also wondering what @DanielleThierryUSDSVA would say.

Context: Some of the wording was changed to be in the past tense (since we're talking about what benefits people had during a past year), and the Content-suggested word "get" was changed to "got".

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood The field labels "Zip code" and "Number of dependents" are the same size as the explanation below. Did they used to be larger or bold? They might be bold already but it's almost imperceptible.

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood Did you decide to not move the "Review the information you entered" link any higher on the review screen in both present and past flows? I recommended putting the link just below the breadcrumb (because it's navigation).

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood Typo in past flow intro screen: "Whether you got certain VA pension benefits last year" should be " "Whether you got certain VA pension benefits in the previous year"

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood Typo in past flow VA pension screen: "To check income limits for 2021, select whether you got this added monthly pension payment in 2020" should be "To check income limits for 2021, select whether you got a VA pension payment in 2020"

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood I'm posting my feedback as I have it (in individual comments), so perhaps you could respond to each with an emoji that indicates whether you agree with the feedback and have fixed it. If you want to discuss more, we could meet or discuss in more comments below.

[thejordanwood]

1. We can have Danielle weigh in on the word "got" because I'm not sure which word is preferred here.
2. I think at one point I had the form labels bold, but according to the official design pattern the label is not bold or a bigger size. It's just a darker color.
3. I decided not to move the "Review the information you entered" link up further because Laura has cautioned us against putting too many links together in a small area. This isn't part of the breadcrumbs, so I want to make sure to separate the two. This is a problem for the mobile version, but on the desktop version we will be able to show multiple breadcrumbs.
4. Those two typos have been fixed!

[cindymerrill]

@thejordanwood Thanks for fixing the typos! We'll wait to hear from Danielle on #1...

[cindymerrill]

Danielle said that either wording is fine, so we'll stick with what we currently have in the prototype.