...
From: 6. http://www.uxforthemasses.com/online-card-sorting/
Maybe this would be right for us:
For example, you might use face-to-face card sorting to explore user’s mental models and to come up with an initial set of groups, and then test this using online card sorting.
From Chris LaRoche:
Funny you mention that – as we have been using web sort for a while, but the UI is a bit clunky and they prices just spiked. We have just started using Optimal Sort, which is a much cleaner UI and a bit more reasonable. You can buy pieces and by the month or an annual subscription.
From Katherine Wahl:
I work with Chris and was copied on this message. I've used web sort quite a bit and just been converted to Optimal Sort. Optimal sort has a much cleaner interface and also allows you ask pre and post sort questions of your users. A few caveats though: right now, the interface is Flash-based and we did have an issue with a user who didn't have the latest version of Flash. They are beta-testing a java-based version but I'm nervous to use that for similar reasons. Would you like me to send you a link to one of our sorts that is up and running? We could even test out the java version if you like.
More from Chris:
We are also starting to use something called Treejack.com – which is almost a reverse card sort order (or verification of the IA). It is a way to have folks go through and complete tasks and see if they use it according to how the IA was set up.
We have found that we use optimal sort to have users set up the IA and then once that is done we use treejack to verify the IA – so it is a more end to end approach of verifying an IA for users.
Treejack: http://www.optimalworkshop.com/treejack.htm?r=getTreejack.com
...
Ideas about how to analyze the data:
In most of the card sorts I’ve facilitated, the best way of doing analysis was to eyeball the data. I’ve learned there is a lot of value in taking this approach. There are a number of tools to help you eyeball your data, and Donna Maurer’s spreadsheet template in particular is quite helpful.
I’ve accepted the fact that card sort analysis--much like usability test analysis-is often messy and subjective. It’s part science, but mostly art. As with many aspects of our work, there isn’t necessarily a single correct, quantitative answer, but rather a number of different qualitative answers--all of which could be correct. Our job is to use our experience and our understanding of people to make judgment calls.
Analysis is a barrier that prevents many people from running card sorts. My suggestion is to leave your obsession with getting the correct answer at the door and accept that analysis gets messy. Not only does this set the right expectations about what card sorting can deliver, it might also open your eyes to other insights you would otherwise miss.