Chevron Left
Designing, Running, and Analyzing Experiments に戻る

カリフォルニア大学サンディエゴ校 による Designing, Running, and Analyzing Experiments の受講者のレビューおよびフィードバック



You may never be sure whether you have an effective user experience until you have tested it with users. In this course, you’ll learn how to design user-centered experiments, how to run such experiments, and how to analyze data from these experiments in order to evaluate and validate user experiences. You will work through real-world examples of experiments from the fields of UX, IxD, and HCI, understanding issues in experiment design and analysis. You will analyze multiple data sets using recipes given to you in the R statistical programming language -- no prior programming experience is assumed or required, but you will be required to read, understand, and modify code snippets provided to you. By the end of the course, you will be able to knowledgeably design, run, and analyze your own experiments that give statistical weight to your designs....




One of the best courses I have taken in relation to UX. Very good design, engaging lectures and examples, and well designed exams. I learned alot and enjoyed listening to Dr. Webbrock. Kudos to him.



Great course.

Highly recommended. It was very clear and I'm very thakful because there were many subjects I only understood partially before this course but are now very clear to me.


Designing, Running, and Analyzing Experiments: 151 - 175 / 213 レビュー

by Ana S R C


There is alot o f bugs on the exams and some questions are really confusing about what the point is about. I liked the way the professor explain every thing and theme was so simple even for someone that has not a background in coding like me.

by Chris C


I think the course requires some basic statistic knowledge which I do not know anything about, it is tough to keep out. If providing some basic reading or keynote before hand would be really helpful!

by Jeffrey K


I​ would give it a 3.5 if there were half scores. This course requires way too much time and is quite tedious, however, the instructor explains the somewhat "dry" material very well.

by Guillermo


The truth is that I expected more. It is one of the most complex parts that I will have to reinforce because there are many things that have not been clear to me

by Tam N


it's a little too much materials. I wish the course materials are less dense, though I really appreciate the efforts of the instructors creating this course

by Juan C D


It's really interesting to learn it but it's not easy at all. Maybe you will need an statistic professor to understand it perfectly.

by Nate L


Way to much stuff for students who haven't learned statistic before.

9 weeks are just too short for these abundant material.

by Ymmannuelle V


While it's a fun course (and challenging), retaining all the information could be a challenge if not put into practice.

by Candice L


Not finding it very useful, but it's good to know about the concepts and theories for each type of experiments.

by Emerson W


This should really be broken up into several separate classes. It is a whole lot at 1 time.

by Justina


I would have rather gone deeper into the tests, than quickly run through them.

by Jared B


Quite advanced in contrast to the rest of this specialization!

by xue z


It requires a lot of knowledge of R and statistic

by Varaga P


Nothing to do with the overall specialization

by XIE Y


Content a bit too hard

by Gloria E W


Very hard

by Kolesova V



by Nicole


I was looking forward to learning [R] Studio. I thought the classes in this course were definitely on the tougher side but for the most part I found the lessons relatively easy to follow if you take notes and I thought the professor's presentation was understandable. It was the quizzes that I take real issue with. Firstly, many of the packages were outdated and I saw numerous comments within the forum about students unable to install or run the packages required for the assessments. Professor Wobrock does mention this in his "readme" doc but that is assuming all students know to read this or to access the forum at all. Additionally, I found that there were many instances when the first quiz for each assessment (covering the concepts) would ask questions about material we had not yet learned. I often flagged this within the coursework when it would appear in the following week's content but there is little sign of any moderator or support for this course since 2019. Additionally, I found that we were being quizzed about a deeper level of interpreting the data than what we actually learned in class. It is one thing to follow along on R while watching the professor do it. There was not enough explanation of WHY we would progress from one line of code to the next, of when to use certain tests or packages over the other. When I did check the forum comments, I noticed professor Wobbrock's tone is rude and condescending. If a majority of students in this course are struggling, that is an issue with the professor, the content, the way the content is being delivered, or all three. It is appalling to me that he repeatedly mentions that the "code is right, the problem must be you" within several of his scant responses on the forum. Lastly, my biggest issue with this course is that we learned how to copy some R code in order to run experiments and analyze data for the specific examples we discussed while following along with the lectures but there was not enough discussion about WHY the lines of code were written the way they were, such as for an interaction plot, this is where the X variable goes, this is where the trace goes etc. Much of the knowledge we are supposed to obtain is possible because of Google. I really object to a professor repeatedly saying "if you want to know more about this, you can Google it." It is not that I even want to know R inside and out, I just want to understand WHY the code is written in the way it was so that I can better replicate the experiments in the future, as well as knowing WHEN to use them. The professor repeatedly says you do not need R experience to take this course but it is my opinion that those who endeavor to complete it would really benefit from beginner knowledge at least OR the materials should be revised to address beginners specifically. I finished this course with a very high average (96%) but I do not feel like I am prepared to use R in a meaningful way. Perhaps I'll "Google it."

by Nicholas J


Throwing graduate level stats and R in towards the end of this certificate is truly baffling, but that aside it was taught well given the limited time.

The course would have been best geared to more practical considerations of research design itself, like more focus on when to use each test, how to get subjects, set up usability testing, issues to look out for etc.

I'm not suggesting testing considerations like sphericity and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test etc. shouldn't have been addressed, but I think the time would have been better spent just laying the foundation for them conceptually, as opposed to getting into the nitty-gritty all the time with R.

by Krzysztof W


Course is not well designed. It focus more on proceeding technically statistical tests than explaining why we do them and how they work. I do not mean how they work on mathematical level but on explaining how they work on data level. For example in one of the previous courses Scott explained how chi square works and it was amazing, this course should be made in the same way. People learn here how to copy code and perform tests without explanation why in this case we do them. It would be nice if cases and data were from real experiments. I dont leave this opinion because the course was difficult, it wasn't for me, I had 100% overall score.

by Parimala H


This is a complex course for people who don't know R Studio. While it is not very hard to learn R Studio (even for people who are not comfortable with coding), it is very difficult when people get stuck. I did not get the much needed support when my R studio installation failed or when installation of libraries failed with error messages. The instructor was good, course content is good, but the lack of a suitable support representative for such complex subjects pulls down the reputation of this course. Please provide a good support personnel to at least help with online queries.

by erin


i can't figure out how to contact anyone about issues with the program used for this course... i have posted in discussions and searched for ways to contact someone and found nothing. more support is needed when using a program that isn't functioning the way we are taught. i'm about to take the quiz for week 6 but 2 of the main functions used gave errors and i'm not sure how to go from there since no contact or help is found readily. this is ruining this course for me, realizing that no support is available for significant issues like this

by Juliana B


I consider that this course, although it has to do with the interaction process, should not be part of the interaction design specialization. The R Studio tool is not normally used in the field of digital design. It is too technical and does not give me the knowledge I need to say that I achieved all the knowledge. This course could be replaced by Digital Analytics or other important content in experience design. It is also very extensive.

by Allison Z


This course was NOT appropriate for the Interaction Design Specialization. It was far too detailed, complex, in depth and advanced! To say a person can take this course without any R or advanced statistics is crazy. It was a real struggle. The teacher obviously knows what he's talking about, so don't want to take away from his skills/ was just a complete mismatch for my goal.

by Mariangela


Quite difficult, I had to do a lot of research and figure out lots of stuff by myself that was not previously indicated. I would have also loved to have a few real scenarios / use cases on how this method comes to be implemented before we started the actual practical part. I know what I learned was useful - I don't know if I will remember it all, but certainly challenging and interesting.