The Reverse Reference Guide: lessons in usability, choice of tool and users feedback

This post was co-authored by Adrian Shell and Paige Dao.

Image by Kelly Sikkema from https://unsplash.com/

Aim and acknowledgement

This blog post aims to share a solution we developed to support our students with referencing and citation. It will outline our rationale, development process, and lessons learned and offer suggestions for those looking to develop interactive study resources in the future.

We would like to thank Sue Lowe, Sarah Jarvis and Hannah Plaisted for their time and support in organising the students’ consultation. Lucy Roper and the Digital Learning and Media Services Team for their input and feedback on this resource.

Why Reverse Referencing Guide – a new approach to referencing and citation support

The Reverse Referencing Guide was developed to show students how to find key bibliographic information within a resource to construct a full reference in the UCEM Harvard referencing system.

Students can access a full UCEM Guide to Referencing and Citation in our virtual learning environment. This provides examples of how to cite and reference different resources following the UCEM Harvard system. However, in pedagogical discussions among teaching staff, the Academic Support and Enhancement Team, and our Digital Learning and Media Services team, it became obvious that some students were finding it difficult to interpret the detailed guide.

A student panel consultation was run to investigate problems that students encounter whilst referencing and this highlighted the following improvements:

  1. The UCEM Guide to Referencing and Citation contains a large number of examples and information. A more accessible format was suggested, especially for students who are new to this area of academic skills;
  2. Breaking down the information into smaller chunks to make it more digestible;
  3. Helping students identify what type of resources they are referencing and citing;
  4. Guidance on where to look for the necessary information;
  5. Simpler guidance on how to correctly format a reference.

What is the Reverse Referencing Guide?

The Reverse Referencing Guide allows students to select a resource that they need to cite and reference. For example, in Figure 1: Home page, students can select a resource under the Menu on the left-hand side of the resource. After selecting the type of resource, they are shown the page or (pages in this case) where information for the reference can be located.

Image of the home page of the Reverse Referencing Guide. On the left hand-side is the menu tab that enable users to navigate through the resource. On the top is the 'Navigation' tab. The bottom right is where users can adjust the resource to full-screen, go to the previous slide or go to the next slide.
Figure 1: Home page of the Reverse Referencing Guide

Figure 2 shows all the elements that are needed to construct a reference in the format of buttons that can be clicked on. When students select the button ‘RICS’ (the corporate author in this case), an animation shows where students can look for details about the author within the resource. Additional information on how to format the content and common errors are also shown.

On the main slide, components such as author, year, title, and others are displayed at the top of the screen. When users select a component (e.g., author), an animation is displayed that explains how students can locate the author of a book, how to format the author's name, and provides examples of good and bad practices.
Figure 2: Components of a reference explained 

Rationale behind the choice of tool

When selecting authoring tools for our project, we began by considering tools that are available to us (both free and paid). We have access to PowerPoint, Word, H5P, as well as Articulate Rise and Storyline. We reviewed student and staff feedback on The UCEM Guide to Referencing and Citation to identify the requirements for the tool:

  • Support user-friendly format for content organisation;
  • Ability to include texts and multimedia;
  • Accessibility;
  • Capability to collect feedback and data for future improvement.

All of the tools considered meet these criteria to varying degrees, but each has its strengths and limitations. For example, while all options allow us to include text and images, tools like PowerPoint, Articulate Rise and Articulate Storyline are better for multimedia (images, audio etc.) and animations.

For this project, we chose Storyline because it allows for concise ways of organising content, which is essential for us. Other tools would require multiple pages to illustrate our ideas for just one type of resource (e.g. book, RICS, journal article,…). Using Storyline allows us to use one base layer (which is visible to students) and overlay multiple layers (only available for the developer) to achieve the same thing, which contributes to the user experience.

Prototyping and getting feedback

During testing the resource with our colleagues and students, we realised the importance of prototyping and gathering feedback. Our initial resource differed significantly from the final version. In an early prototype (Figure 3), even though the elements of the reference were clickable, users didn’t realise that they were. To improve this, we redesigned the elements to make them look more like buttons and added a hover state to indicate interactivity (Figure 4).

On the main slide, components such as author, years, and title of a reference were placed at the bottom of the slide. There's no clear indication that these components are clickable.
Figure 3: One of the first prototypes
On the main slide of the final resource, components of author, year, title and others are placed at the top of the slide. There's a line of instruction that says 'click or tab each part of the reference to reveal where information can be located'. The main slide also includes images with explanation texts. There's a button to reset the slide to its initial state.
Figure 4: What the final resource looks like

Initially, we also provided audio for students to listen to when selecting an element, thinking it would enhance the multimedia experience. However, feedback revealed that students preferred text, as it gave them more control over the content.

Another helpful step was showing these prototypes to colleagues before testing them with students – the end users of this resource. For instance, without instructions, we asked colleagues to share their screens while they navigated the resource. Many struggled initially to understand its purpose and where to click, which highlighted the need for a navigation tour. With helpful suggestions from a colleague, we incorporated screenshots into the navigation tour to guide new users. We then tested this again with another colleague, who navigated through the resource who navigated the resource with few challenges, before including the prototypes in the consultation questionnaire.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the development of the Reverse Reference Guide has been an iterative process which was shaped by feedback from both students and staff. We hope that by simplifying complex guidelines, integrating interactive elements, and incorporating user feedback, we have created a more accessible and interactive tool. Moving forward, we will add new elements and gather feedback from students to refine this resource further. We hope that this guide serves as an example for others developing study resources, emphasising the importance of user feedback, accessibility and interactive design.