Would you rather read or watch your instructions?

Would you rather read or watch your instructions?

By Seda Japp, PhD

As usability researchers, we strive to design intuitive products that can be used safely whether or not the user chooses to read the instructions. Although safety-by-design is the gold standard, it is not always possible to mitigate risk exclusively by the design of the device. This is where training and labeling can be leveraged. Unfortunately, we do not always know how effective instructional information on the labeling is. Too often we hear our participants proudly state, “I NEVER read instructions.” Given the shortening attention span that comes with living in our fast-paced modern society, increasingly more participants—especially the younger ones—report that they would prefer to watch a tutorial instead of read text-based instructions. You are a busy person too. Would you rather watch a short video instead of reading this blog post?

Effectiveness of different instructional materials

Previous studies on the effectiveness of video- versus text-based information have yielded diverse results. A study from the University of Twente in the Netherlands, investigated the effectiveness of video versus text-based instructions with employees of a big corporation learning how to use a software program.1 Interestingly, no significant difference in recall rates was found between the group that was shown a video and the group that was presented a PDF version of the instructions. These results are in line with other research studies.2 Surprisingly, the employees given instructions in a PDF did complete the comprehension test faster. 

However, another recent study showed that video instructions were more effective compared with text-based instructions in improving errors associated with inhaler use.3 In line with this study, another study found that video-based tutorials were more effective for learning a software program compared to paper-based tutorials.4  Studies suggest that interactive video tutorials provide better outcomes than noninteractive videos.5  

User preference

Another point to take into consideration is the likelihood of users actually using the instructional material. A survey by Gadget6  revealed that 64% of men do not read the user manual before calling tech support. Although user researchers are aware of this fact, there does not appear to be a one-size-fits-all solution. 

Our experience suggests that different users have different learning preferences. For example, videos may be the preferred method for younger users to learn how to use a new product. Product type or experience of users might also have an effect. For example, users might be more likely to want visual instructions when the user interface is perceived to be more complex or when the user is more invested in receiving the treatment (e.g., an expensive or high-stakes treatment may receive more attention compared with a routine treatment for a chronic condition). Although videos might be more effective for users who have experience with similar products because they provide a quick introduction, written instructions may present more in-depth information for newbies. Interactive videos might be more effective for procedural learning (e.g., learning different steps of how to use a product), but similar evidence is lacking for factual learning (e.g., learning some facts about the product).

Another strategy to consider is to have both forms of instructions available and let the users choose the one they would like to refer to in real life. In practice, one way to do this is to make the instructions part of the human factors (HF) validation test. The video could be developed as “marketing material” to improve usability and use compliance. This way it would not be included in the regulatory submission as a component of the product labeling and thus not included in the HF validation test.

Conclusion

Training material needs to be accessible to each and every user; therefore, the FDA discourages using only videos as training material and testing training videos in HF validation. However, there may be ways to integrate the training video into the product so that each user must first watch a video before using the product (e.g., the user might be prompted to watch a video before starting to use an app).

At Core Human Factors, we help our clients understand their users’ needs and we can advise on what types of instructions would work best for their product and users. We have extensive experience in designing IFUs for regulatory submissions, conducting expert reviews on training materials, and testing IFUs. We can also help you find out whether your users would prefer video or text-based instructions.

How would you like your instructions? And how would your users like their instructions?

References

1. Scheurwater N. Video Vs. Test: Assessing the Effectiveness of a Video Tutorial on the Procedural and Factual Knowledge of Production Workers and Its Potential Benefits Over a Tutorial With Text and Still Graphics [master’s thesis]. Enschede, Netherlands: University of Twente; 2017.
2. Alexander KP. The usability of print and online video instructions. Technical Communication Quarterly. 2013;22(3): 237-259. doi: 10.1080/10572252.2013.775628
3. Romil FS, Rakesh MG. Video instruction is more effective than written instruction in improving inhaler technique. Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2017; 46(October 2017): 16-19. doi: 10.1016/j.pupt.2017.08.005
4. van der Meij H, van der Meij J. A comparison of paper-based and video tutorials for software learning. Computers & Education. 2014;78(September 2014): 150-159. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.003
5. Schwan S, Riempp R. The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction. 2004;14(3): 293-305. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005
6. Gadget problems divide the sexes. BBC News. November 6, 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8346810.stm. Accessed February 15, 2019.