Life Insurance Quiz
A life insurance questionnaire that uses user inputs to provide an individual policy recommendation, and then the option to continue with Policygenius in order to receive a full quote.
Competitor Analysis
To begin, I researched a number of competitor quiz experiences within the life insurance space. I then collected assets from each competitor to catalogue, compare, and identify trends in the UI and content.
Leveraging the questions and categories covered, I drafted a user flow to serve as the bones of the life insurance picker.
Trends
Quiz Results: How much will my life insurance cost / How much insurance do I need
Format: Traditional Calculator (Entry Fields w/ labels & a calculate button) or Questionnaire (Step by step modules)
With all of the competitor data collected, I was able to determine which major questions were being asked of users.
Low Fidelity Wireframes
Pulling from the initial competitor analysis I started by desiging a flow of low fidelity wireframes. These were intended to layout a basic blueprint for the overall structure, layout, and key interactions without including detailed visual elements.
Mid Fidelity Prototype
With a blueprint established my next step was to tie in interactive elements and editorial content.
High Fidelity Prototype
With stakeholder sign off on content, I proceeded to apply Investopedia’s branding to the prototype. Leveraging their colors, typography, logos, and interactive elements.
The Entry / Trigger point
Investopedia branded logo, colors, and fonts to insure seamless integration into content.
Bright, striking CTA button to catch the attention of the reader.
Copy intended to encourage the user to click/convert by communicating the speed and ease of the survey flow.
Question Flow / Survey
A series of only 3 questions asking for personal information
Chose to keep it simple and only ask 3 questions, to reduce cognitive load on the user. Additionally, responses for questions asked could be answered off hand.
Avoided asking for any information that could be considered more private. For example, health history, phone number, SS#, etc..
Recommendation Screen
Copy intended to instill the user with a sense of personalization; Results catered towards them.
Graphics to accompany the policy recommendation, to help explain what the policy could potentially cover.
User Testing Round 1
With our High Fidelity Prototype completed, our attention now turned towards testing the quiz with users to identify any areas of friction in the flow. For this first round we would focus specifically on the entry point of the quiz.
Goal
Determine if quiz entrance is effective at engaging users. If not, then identify why.
Learn whether the final screen was easy to understand and would encourage convertion.
Identify any unforeseen frustrations within the questionnaire flow.
Methodology
I utilized the platform PlaybookUX to recruit participants for our testing. In this round I ran testing with 10 people total; 5 for desktop and 5 for mobile. In order to participate, users has to pass a screening test which asked whether they had researched or shopped for life insurance within the past month.
Tasks
Before clicking/tapping on anything take a look around the screen tell me what you see and what you think you can do here.
Locate the box where is says “Compare Best Life Insurance“. What do you think that is. What do you think would happen if you clicked on it?
Click through and try to complete the quiz.
Testing Results
“This is where they take your info, send it out to different companies, and you start getting a whole bunch of emails and calls about life insurance.”
“ It looks like it could be like a a scam website”
Participants either did not notice the quiz trigger, or chose to ignore it, while browsing the webpage.
When the quiz entry was pointed out to participants, they assumed that the quiz was either an ad or spam due to its design (specifically the border box).
Once users progressed through the flow to the final result, they found that the results were confusing. Specifically, the use of the graph. They were not sure what to do next.
The Redesign
With our first round of testing complete, my next step was to take the participant feedback and leverage it to inform the quiz’s design updates.
Entry Point
Remove border box around the entry point and left align it with the article, as a means to make the trigger appear better integrated into the article, rather than look like a separate sponsored ad block
Update the copy to feel less aggressive and more friendly & conversational.
Remove the large cta trigger. While it brought a greater visual presence, test participants associated it with scams and pop-up ads.
Before
Results screen
Remove the data visualization, since it led to more confusion than clarity in testing.
Focus attention more on the poly and coverage details, since they are the most important piece of information to convey.
Add in an advertising disclosure, for greater transparency.
Before
After
After
User Testing Round 2
With the new designs finished my next step was to run the same user testing done previously to gauge whether the updates had improved the quiz’s visibility and communication of intent.
Goals
Determine if quiz entrance is more effective at being both noticed by user and encouraging them to click/interact.
Identify anything pain point within the experience, regarding interactions and ease of use.
Determine whether user still have concerns regarding beign scammed/privacy.
Methodology
I again utilized the platform PlaybookUX to recruit participants for our testing. I ran testing with 10 people total; 5 for desktop and 5 for mobile. In order to participate, users has to pass a screening test which asked whether they had researched or shopped for life insurance within the past month.
Tasks
Before clicking/tapping on anything take a look around the screen tell me what you see and what you think you can do here.
What do you think the picker/quiz is? What do you think would happen if you clicked on it?
Is the picker something you would click on?
Click through the quiz to the end. Is there an
Round 2 Test Results
Following the visual updates, none of the test subject mentioned the words “scam” or expressed any concern about divulging personal data.
All users said that if they were looking for insurance they would click on the picker to learn more.
Multiple users also expressed that they felt it was a good way to narrow down their options, and determine what would make the most sense for them.
When asked what they think would happen if they were to click on the quiz trigger:
“I would say that that is gonna give me a quiz and it’ll give me what is best for me based on my qualifications”
“Looks like you’d answer a few question, a snapshot of your lifestyle”
When asked whether they would click on the quiz trigger if they saw it within an article:
“If i was looking for insurance and wanted to get more info I would”
“Yeah if i was really interested in looking for life insurance I would want to see what it’s about.. I’m trying to cut as many corners as possible to find the right insurance, so hopefully this would get me there”
Outcomes & Successes
Updates to the entry point and copy improved user sentiment and assumptions regarding whether the quiz could be trusted.
Overall the users felt positive about answering personal questions, and no longer were concerned about data privacy. They saw the questions as a shortcut to getting them to a policy match.
Once the redesign was implemented on Investopedia, the conversion rate of picker flow doubled from 1.5 to 3% conversions.