this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2023
1052 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37739 readers
500 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A/B testing is cheaper than hiring real testers
A/B feature testing is useful for gauging customer sentiment and improve UI/UX based on a much wider sample size than QA testing.
Absolutely and frankly I'd be perfectly fine with A/B testing if it was opt-in. Pop up a little window or notification that says "Hey, this is a new feature, you want it?"
If
You know the feature isn't good and to move on. A lot of people would call that data inconclusive because they want to believe the feature is good but not being able to convince people to opt-in is feedback.
Experimenting on users should be illegal.
Most A/B tests are experiments on features, not on their users.
There's a difference in finding out what features users likes and let's see if we can manipulate their feelings or get them depressed.
The one Facebook did is not really A/B feature testing.
Those who opt-in to tests can have biased results, it's like asking those running Windows 11 if they like Windows 11 more than Windows 10.