Towards the Study of Civic Usability: Bringing Together Civic Mobilisation and User Experience

The theory and practice of web usability has grown rapidly over the last ten years, leading to the widespread implementation of standards, benchmarks and practices, especially in the corporate sector (e.g. ISO 13407 1999). The work of Nielsen (e.g.

Nielsen and Tahir 2001, Nielsen 2009b) has been particularly instrumental in setting and disseminating industry standards. However, while the usability industry has witnessed considerable advances in the development of sophisticated information architecture and user testing practices, such as agile software design and eye tracking (e.g. Tzanidou, Petre, Minocha and Grayson 2005), the “civic web” still appears far removed from the end user, i.e. the citizen.

The present study aims to address an important gap in the literature of online youth civic engagement, i.e. the study of the civic web with an emphasis on the user – what could

be called civic usability. Mitra, Willyard, Platt and Parsons (2005) is one of the very few studies examining young people’s (and in particular students’) criteria of evaluating websites. Moreover, Coleman, Lieber, Mendelson and Kurpius (2008) is the only

published scholarly study that has attempted to link a user-oriented media theory (Uses and Gratifications) to the issue of civic engagement and apply that to an examination of civic sites’ usability with the view to encouraging citizens to participate in politics via the net. Coleman et al. found “no literature that discussed usability testing of websites for commercial sites such as those news organizations, governments, candidates, non-profits or NGOs” (2008: 187) and reiterate that “there is no research that examines which features of a website actually enhance or impede civic engagement” (2008: 180). While Coleman et al. carried out an experimental design, our study will be taking a slightly different approach, juxtaposing a comprehensive civic web content analysis with users’

own evaluations and responses to civic websites.

Such an investigation could potentially shed some light on the scholarly divide amongst those who consider civic-minded young people to constitute a distinct demographic (Livingstone, Bober and Helsper 2005) and those who argue that everyday internet activities such as consumption and online networking go hand-in-hand with digital political participation (de Vreese 2007). That is to say, it is uncertain whether there is a line separating those who are willing to participate online from the majority of young users/citizens/consumers who engage in a range of other, non-civic activities. This study will be partly focusing on a group of highly internet-literate media students, who,

however, are not part of a politically active community. This will allow us to establish whether – and, if so, under which conditions – these young people are willing to cross that important but elusive line of engagement and use the net for civic purposes. It may be the case that in addition to empowering citizens who, for a number of reasons, are already mobilised (i.e. are intrinsically motivated), civic websites may offer users a range of stimuli that motivate citizens extrinsically and boost their sense of external efficacy (Kim 2007).

It is, thus, essential to first contextualise and link young people’s civic attitudes to their internet uses; only through understanding what motivates young citizens to engage with civic and global issues online will we be able to build those cultural and institutional safeguards, which will facilitate access and engagement with the democratic process – what scholars call an “enabling environment” (McNutt 2004). In order to do that, the study will be exploring participants civic narratives – and especially key motivators and de-motivators – and, subsequently, asking users to translate these factors into specific online features, activities and applications that they would like to see on civic websites.

This will be followed by an in-depth content analysis of civic websites in order to register and evaluate current approaches to online engagement in the UK online public sphere – and compare those to the participants’ expectations and needs. A range of criteria and benchmarks covering content, design, navigation and interactivity will be employed from the relevant literature. A range of civic organisations – both government-led and non-governmental – have produced websites aiming to promote issue campaigns, raise awareness and mobilise citizens. It is important to evaluate the extent to which such efforts meet basic standards of accessibility, transparency, appeal, interactivity, as well

as substantial empowerment. Burt and Taylor (2008: 1051) argue that civic sites should include “guidance on how to engage with the formal institutions of government and with private enterprise, through the exercise of ‘consumer democratic rights’”, as well as online links to various independent bodies and affiliate organisations, along with participation tools and emotive imagery.

One of the common pitfalls amongst top-down youth websites is their approach to

aesthetics and, in particular, their effort to “look cool”. As Coleman and Rowe 2005 note, such as attempts are bound to fail, especially if sites are not designed by young people themselves. Content creators and designers need to have an in-depth understanding of what users are looking for in a website. The appeal of a site, however, is only one aspect of its design. Attracting young users to an online space is not enough in itself.

Accessibility and usability are major factors that ought to guide both design and content.

New information and communication technologies can be particularly empowering for traditionally marginalised groups such as young people, the disabled or those with mental illnesses (Mäkinen 2004). Access to the online public sphere should include the ability to make the most of the medium, i.e. to be able to access the tools and facilities available, as well as understand the online culture, language and risks (Diamond and Shreve 2004). Therefore, enhancing accessibility can be achieved by: “providing online information in terms of specific live events or policy issues; search engines; software for style checking and improving the intelligibility of government texts; multilingual

translations of official documents; and provision of online glossaries” (OCED 2001 in McNutt 2004: 16) as well as providing for people with special needs.

The information, tools and community prospects offered by a site also need to be considered carefully as these are ultimately the substantive elements upon which the potential of mobilisation depends. At a first level this involves making people care about the organisation’s agenda or issue, i.e. appealing either to the citizens’ values and moral principles, or to their personal interest. Ideally, the website should have a specific

agenda with a clear focus, grounded in a local setting or a specific problem. In addition to motivating visitors into engaging with an issue, we hypothesise that demonstrating the relevance of an issue, as well as specific ways through which the citizen can make a difference or contribute to a debate, should be vital in facilitating civic efficacy. Coleman (1999: 71) argues that “any notion of a relationship between public input and policy output” is currently missing from politicians’ use of the internet.

That is to say, there needs to be a link between the participating process and the

participants’ lifeworld, i.e. a bridge between the ‘macro’ and ‘micro’ levels of politics. Delli Carpini (2000: 346) notes that civic engagement has become defined “as the one-on-one experience of working in a soup kitchen, cleaning trash from a local river, or tutoring a child once a week”. It is important to test whether civic websites demonstrate (or miss)

“an awareness of the connection between the individual, isolated ‘problems’ these actions are intended to address and the larger world of public policy”, i.e. being able to connect one’s actions to the world at large and to see the outcome of their contribution.

That links back to the process of political socialisation and how individuals integrate themselves into the body politic, and it is precisely what online youth – or indeed any civic – engagement projects ought to do.

Another common problem of online discussion and consultation spaces is the lack of follow-up action; the mere “existence of a communications channel counts for nothing if information is not acted upon” (Coleman, Morrison and Svennevig 2006: 6). As

Livingstone, Bober and Helsper (2005: 306) explain “other than receiving information, it is unclear to young people what they stand to gain from the opportunity to ‘have their say’ online”. Accountability and transparency are important ingredients for an effective and credible online presence (OECD 2001).

Finally, scholars have argued that, in addition to design and content, the existence of an online community is a decisive factor in a successful online strategy. This is particularly important for sites attempting to mobilise younger users who, as discussed above, seem to favour a mode of interaction along the lines of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) and Social Networking Sites (SNS). According to Montgomery, Gottlieb-Robles and Larson (2004: 14), even if the site features good material “websites may be most effective when used within a well-defined community that can commit to sustained use… as opposed to one-time, involvement”.

These criteria for the analysis of civic websites are further distilled in Chapter 3.

However, merely evaluating what is available “out there” is not enough to assess a site’s eventual success, nor does it give us any understanding of what young people are actually looking for and how they respond to that real-life material. For that reason, another major objective of this study is to compare the analysis of website content with young users’ own evaluations of that material as part of our effort to investigate their online civic attitudes. This is essentially an exploratory attempt to facilitate a dialogue between the (online civic) text and the (young citizen) user, as well as between potential and actual uses – both by civic producers and users.

The broader aim of this quest is to understand whether a more interactive and

empowering mode of civic communication has emerged, or if not yet, whether such a mode is possible and under which conditions. Recent evidence provided by site

producers (Banaji 2008b) suggests that the number of young people who actually take up the offers for engagement via youth sites and projects is quite small. It is important to establish whether there is a gap of expectations between online civic texts and end-users. This dialectical approach can be particularly beneficial to the study of interactivity both as an attribute of technology and as a perceived user experience (Sundar 2004), addressing potentially important mismatches between producers and users.

Di Gennaro and Dutton (2006: 300) found that “[c]ompared to the debate generated around [the issue of the internet and civic engagement], there have been relatively few empirical studies of [online] political behaviour in both the United States and United Kingdom”; that is particularly true regarding youth political behaviour and even more so in a way that links an evaluation of online civic material that is already available with young users’ own narratives, expectations and reactions. It is that gap that this study attempts to address in the following chapters.

“It is important to understand not just why people are disengaging from public life and what forms of media contribute to this, but also to discover ways to counteract this trend. Social science should strive not only to understand, explain and predict opinions, attitudes and behavior, but also to improve society by findings ways to promote social interaction and civic engagement”.

(Coleman, Lieber, Mendelson and Kurpius 2008: 180)

Chapter 3