Once a usability test session ends, you are left with a messy pile of evidence: session notes, observer tallies, recordings, think-aloud quotes, task timings, and error counts. Compiling structured results is the work of turning that raw material into something a design team can act on. It involves organizing data by participant and by task, grouping individual observations into recurring usability problems, rating those problems by severity, and then assembling a report that pairs numbers with illustrative evidence and concrete recommendations.
This matters in CEN3722 because a usability test only has value if its findings reach the people who build the interface in a form they can use. A report that lists forty unsorted observations with no prioritization gives a team no idea where to start. A report that states results more confidently than the data warrants can push a team toward the wrong redesign. Your job is to be both useful and honest: clear about what you found, clear about how strong the evidence is, and clear about what should change.
The three videos below come from Nielsen Norman Group, a long-established usability consultancy. As you watch, focus on three things: how severity criteria help you decide what to report first, how to describe findings truthfully when sample sizes are small, and how framing and context affect whether your audience actually engages with your recommendations. Take notes you can apply directly to your team's results document.
This short video explains how to assign severity ratings to usability problems found during usability studies or heuristic evaluation, using a small set of criteria rather than gut feeling. Expect discussion of factors such as how often a problem occurs, how badly it blocks users, and how persistent it is across a task. The result is a prioritized list rather than an undifferentiated set of observations.
Severity rating is the bridge between raw observations and an actionable report, which makes this directly relevant to identifying usability problems and patterns and to structuring the results document around priority.
This video addresses how to present research results to stakeholders truthfully and responsibly, including how to avoid overstating what a small study can support. It is likely to touch on careful use of numbers and percentages, appropriate hedging, and being transparent about method and sample. The emphasis is on communicating findings without distorting them.
It speaks directly to presenting quantitative findings honestly, a common failure point when student teams report percentages from five or six participants.
This video covers how to set the stage with stakeholders before presenting UX design or research work so that the feedback you receive is useful. It discusses providing context, framing what kind of input you are seeking, and structuring the conversation around the goals of the work. The focus is on the presentation setup rather than the findings themselves.
Presenting qualitative findings and recommendations is a conversation, not just a document, and this video shows how framing and context shape whether your recommendations get a serious hearing.
These videos extend the module's data collection work into the reporting stage. Having facilitated sessions (MO1) and gathered both quantitative measures such as task completion, errors, and time-on-task alongside qualitative think-aloud observations (MO2), students need a disciplined way to compile both kinds of evidence into one structured document. The severity rating video supplies criteria for turning scattered observations into prioritized problems; the responsible presentation video reinforces the MO3 concern for data integrity by showing how to report findings without overstating what the data supports; and the feedback video helps students deliver recommendations in a way that stakeholders can engage with productively.
These videos were chosen from YouTube on October 3, 2026. Each has captions; the player turns them on. Videos on YouTube can be changed or removed — if one no longer plays, tell your instructor. If a player does not appear, use its Watch on YouTube link.