Not YouGov this time: You <b>must</b> have travelled more than 200 miles..
-
-
And further on in the actual survey...
FILE_NOT_FOUND_NOT_FOUND
-
More idiocy:
It's like QA doesn't exist when writing these things...
-
How about the 'none of the above' box at the bottom?
-
Gah! I got complacent there - most of the screens didn't actually have a
none of the above
option...
-
OK, I can see that there is no provision for "none" with the mileage one. I can see that there is no provision for "none" with the supplements one, although an answer of "no" or "none" could legitimately be given in response to Any other supplements... and I will accept the presentation is unorthodox, but I'm guessing that they are some sort of CSS / JS driven "checkboxes". But for the life of me I cannot "see" the idiocy of the financial products, unless it is the use of the word "purchase". That said, it is noticed that the "none of the above" things may be radio buttons, but without any observable behavior or clue as to their behavior i.e. can you only select one or the other? Will selecting the button clear all the tick boxes in that column?
In the past (and in the future) it is a technique I use: The radio button is either on or off. If it is on, in this case, I can then ignore the check boxes. Although I will admit that sometimes I make the radio button look and function like a check box, or rather I make a check box behave like a radio button, so as to not "confuse"the expectations of the User.
-
Will selecting the button clear all the tick boxes in that column?
That would be my expectation, but who knows about that brillant implementation.
I make a check box behave like a radio button
-
That reminds me of a government survey I took a few years ago, which among other questions asked about the places where I feel unsafe:
Most aren’t important, but number 7 reads “in your own home?” and the second-to-last column is headed “Not applicable: I never go there” …
-
But for the life of me I cannot "see" the idiocy of the financial products, unless it is the use of the word "purchase"
If you're not a 'regular' of this sort of thing (I am) you don't tend to notice the dire presentation of either the questions or the presented answers to the questions. Or (a quarter of the way through) what answers they're trying to garner.
I done fucked up with not noticing the "none of the above" answer that I did screenshot, however that situation is prevalent with such things - if you do that thing for a while you have expectations - that one failed in that respect. Hence the QA comment.
Fitts law applies here I think. If not "applies" then describes my behaviour.
-
You know if you're filling out those surveys so you can get "free immediate access" to pirated TV shows, or 250 quatloos in your favorite online game's currency, it's not going to work.
-
I have more than once aborted a survey 'because apparently they're not interested in my opinion/experience'.
-
but number 7 reads “in your own home?” and the second-to-last column is headed “Not applicable: I never go there” …
It is a hidden idiot test. If you check it they invalidate your answers as 'user is too stupid'.
Or it might be a troll check. They would probably catch me with it.
-
More likely they wouldn’t understand what you’re on about at all if you tried to troll them. (A government form I had to fill out recently involved giving details of my wealth, and it wanted me to include “copies of all [my] bank accounts.” I wrote in the comments section that since copying a bank account is not something I’m able to do, I instead decided to include a print-out of the bank account statement. Even funnier is, of course, that anyone who wants to can cheat as much as they like with a print-out from a web site, yet government agencies are bound to take them as 100% accurate.)
-
All financial data I had to provide in the last decade where based on tax forms. Last years they pull even that electronically. Just sign digitally with your e-id and Bob's your uncle.
-
-
box
It was a radio button. This (presumably) will erase any checked checkboxes in the column.
sometimes I make the radio button look and function like a check box,
Oh boy...
-
I'll probably select "Any other supplements" and write "N/A" there.
Or you may try to put a message on the textbox. Just to see if the "WTF" reply will actually show up in the final analysis.
-
'none of the above' box
The checkboxes mean such a thing is not needed. You uncheck the boxes.
If you have a lot of boxes you might have options for check-all/uncheck-all.
An unchecking radio button though? I can't think what's technically wrong with it, but it feels sticky and weird.
-
That's because it's wrong. Radio buttons are a "select one thing from the list of things, usually mandatorily, where all things are visible together" deal. There should be no "unselection" except by a secondary "not applicable" choice.
-
select one thing from the list of things, usually mandatorily, where all things are visible together
I think the thinking must have been that it's mutually exclusive to the checkboxes.
I agree though, in my opinion it should only be used with other radio buttons.
I've no idea whether there's a case for an unselection function though.
-
Apparently you can do anything with JS and CSS these days, so much so that you don't need the old HTML stuff any more. There is a website forum thingy place I frequently visit that demonstrates the truth of it.
Hang on and I'll get you a link to it....
-
Apparently you can do anything with JS and CSS these days
You definitely can, but whether or not you should...
It comes down to UX and maintainability. If the next dev knows what they're looking at and the user knows what they're looking at, it's probably fine.
-
That's for the AirBnB renters.
-
it feels sticky and weird
-
-
2016 is missing!
-
And people born in 2015 can legitimately complete the questionnaire, can they?
-
And people born in 2015 can legitimately complete the questionnaire, can they?
That was sorta my point....
-
No-one only (up to) 27 days old could be legit, of course but maybe someone 28 days old or older could be?
-