For our research project, a colleague and I will use the DearScholar app.
In order to have it working optimally for your study sample, we did a pilot round where we tested both the accessibility and working of the app among different sorts of people.
We noticed the following things:
First, the simplicity of the application was very much appreciated among the people within our real study sample (nurses). They found the app user-friendly and found easily their way of working with the app. Especially the fact that it is minimalistically designed and therefore not distracting was something that was positively noted.
Second, though the first time of using is more time-consuming compared to the second time and forth, they were positive about the amount of effort that is needed to complete the diaries. In our setup, it took nurses less than 5 minutes to complete all questions.
Third, the nurses in our pilot liked the fact that the diary setup let them reflect on their workdays, and that it allowed them to do so in their own words. Other studies, mostly surveys, already frame their way of thinking due to the fixed character. The dairy approach, however, allowed them to really activate their own reflective process and write it down in the words.
We also have a few points that could be improved in new versions of the app. These all have to do with accessibility
First, some of the pilot respondents would have preferred to zoom in on the questions on their mobile devices. The app does not yet offer this option.
Second, the app could be improved by adding a 'read-out-loud' function for respondents that for instance have problems with reading or their sight.
Third, in the app format now for MC-questions, you need to open the options. It would be helpful to have all options already open on the page, so respondents immediately see these.
Hi Peter and community,
For our research project, a colleague and I will use the DearScholar app. In order to have it working optimally for your study sample, we did a pilot round where we tested both the accessibility and working of the app among different sorts of people. We noticed the following things: First, the simplicity of the application was very much appreciated among the people within our real study sample (nurses). They found the app user-friendly and found easily their way of working with the app. Especially the fact that it is minimalistically designed and therefore not distracting was something that was positively noted. Second, though the first time of using is more time-consuming compared to the second time and forth, they were positive about the amount of effort that is needed to complete the diaries. In our setup, it took nurses less than 5 minutes to complete all questions. Third, the nurses in our pilot liked the fact that the diary setup let them reflect on their workdays, and that it allowed them to do so in their own words. Other studies, mostly surveys, already frame their way of thinking due to the fixed character. The dairy approach, however, allowed them to really activate their own reflective process and write it down in the words.
We also have a few points that could be improved in new versions of the app. These all have to do with accessibility First, some of the pilot respondents would have preferred to zoom in on the questions on their mobile devices. The app does not yet offer this option. Second, the app could be improved by adding a 'read-out-loud' function for respondents that for instance have problems with reading or their sight. Third, in the app format now for MC-questions, you need to open the options. It would be helpful to have all options already open on the page, so respondents immediately see these.
Good luck! Renée