Identifying design guidelines for online information resources: a study of expectant and new mothers

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to identify design guidelines for online resources based on the subjective assessment criteria used by individuals to assess and process information resources. This method of creating design guidelines targeted at precise user groups has the potential to aid designers and developers to create more user-centred information resources.Design/methodology/approachThe authors gathered data using a prospective longitudinal study investigating the information behaviour of expectant and new mothers. Women were asked to report on their information-seeking activities in a series of semi-structured interviews covering pregnancy and early motherhood.FindingsThis research identified 15 assessment criteria that were utilised by women to assess and process information resources. The most popular resource criteria amongst participants were credibility and convenience, while completeness and relevance were the most popular information content criteria. The authors found that assessment criteria were not considered in isolation, with criteria such as formatting and search engine ranking impacting on participants' perception of other criteria.Practical implicationsThis research demonstrates the potential of linking a user groups subjective assessment criterion to design guidelines. The authors propose that these guidelines could be used to help design an online information resource. They could also be used to assess if an existing online resource met the needs of a user group. The methodology used in this study could be leveraged to create design guidelines for user groups.Originality/valueThis research uses subjective assessment criteria as a means of understanding how expectant new mothers process information resources. People use subjective judgements when processing information resources, and this should be incorporated into the design of information resources. Analysing longitudinal data allowed the authors to build a rich picture of how participants evaluated and compared different information resources.