How content testing improved conversions for Boots' new mental health service
.png)
Boots were piloting a new mental health service called Let's Talk.
An app and web product built in partnership with Livi, patients could book and speak to a private therapist by video call.
Problem
The service was new and still being trialed – not everyone in the business was convinced it would work.
Bookings were low and management did not want to invest any more time or money before we’d proven the concept with real users.
Goal 🎯
Boots wanted to boost the number of bookings without investing in marketing or advertising.
We needed to improve the design and content of the landing page and booking flow.
How could we get more patients to use the product and prove it could grow?
Design and marketing going round in circles...
I had a few ideas for how the content could be improved, but everyone seemed to have a different understanding of the problem. We weren’t making any progress.
Feeling that we were going round in circles, I decided to run my own research and testing project.
The plan was to test my ideas. And if I was right, gather some evidence to put forward my case for changing the content.
The test 🧪
Using a consumer research and user testing tool, UserZoom, I wrote and designed a content test and survey.
I asked 100 participants questions about what they needed to know before booking a therapist and what they considered important about choosing an online therapy service.
The participants were also shown a prototype of the latest design and asked questions to gauge their understanding and interest.
Hypothesis 1: Our proposition does not appeal to what users need
I thought our landing page content may be too focused on ‘convenience’ and ‘ease’.
For something as sensitive and serious as mental health, maybe professionalism or trust are more important for new users?
Before
🤔
The existing copy puts a strong emphasis on the convenience of digital healthcare.
Is this the most persuasive reason for choosing Boots’ therapy service?
Would professionalism or effective treatment resonate with more users?
How I tested the benefits and proposition content
I asked 100 users…
"Imagine you are researching a new online therapy, which of these key benefits sounds most appealing to you?"
They were asked to arrange a list of hypothetical benefits in order of importance.
Results
Hypothesis confirmed ✅
Far more participants valued expertise of the therapist and effective treatment over convenience and ease.
How we changed the benefits after my research
After
✅
Following what users think is important, the content focuses on trust, professionalism and effective treatment.
UX principle:
Understand your users
"If you want your content to succeed, you need to understand who your audience are and what they want from you."
Sarah Richards, Content Design
Hypothesis 2: We're not mentioning key issues that people need help with
I thought the existing content focused on relatively niche mental health problems.
I wondered if we could focus on more common problems that may resonate with more people.
Before
🤔
How common is Obsessive Compulsive Disorder relative to other mental health conditions?
We've already mentioned anxiety. Is it wasting valuable space to mention social anxiety too?
Are we sure we're highlighting the right issues that people need help with?
How I tested if we're focusing on the right mental health issues
I asked 100 users…
"If you spoke to a therapist about your mental health, which of these issues would you want to discuss?
Participants were asked to select a maximum of 5 mental health issues and rank the issues in order of importance.
Results
Hypothesis confirmed ✅
Sleep problems and stress resonated with far more people than OCD or social anxiety.
How we changed the content after my research
After
✅
Focusing on what users need help with, the content highlights the most common mental health issues.
UX principle:
Data-driven content
"Let data drive decision-making, not hunches or guesswork. Keep doing that after taking your service live, prototyping and testing with users then iterating in response."
GOV.UK Design Principles
Hypothesis 3: The therapist bios contained jargon that users would not understand
As part of the booking process, users were asked to choose a therapist.
But I was concerned the therapist bios were quite dense and difficult to understand.
The technical terms and specialist language didn't sit well with my principles of plain language and writing for everyone.
Before
🤔
What does 'HCPC-registered clinical psychologist' mean to the average person?
Would any of this make sense to a non-specialist?
Would users feel alienated and put-off by this level of detail?
How I tested the therapist bios
I asked 100 patients to read 2 different versions of the same therapist bio.
Participants were asked to choose which version they prefer and explain why.
Version A
Joe is an HCPC-registered clinical psychologist and the clinical lead for mental health. He has been supporting clients for over 25 years as they navigate challenges as diverse as substance abuse, depression, anxiety, and cognitive problems. He is committed to empowering his clients with the skills they need to succeed on their journey to improve their mental health and wellbeing.
Version B
Joe is a clinical psychologist and the clinical lead for mental health.
For over 25 years, Joe has helped people overcome all kinds of mental health challenges. To name just a few, he has helped people with depression, anxiety, and cognitive problems. Joe is committed to helping people on their journey to better mental health.
Results
My hypothesis was wrong! ❌
Most users preferred version A, the dense version.
Even if users didn't understand all of the qualifications and terms, they found the detail reassuring. They said it sounded more professional and trustworthy.
Here are some quotes from users:
“It sounds more professional and credible to me”
“Gives a greater feeling of trust”
“I liked that they were specific about certifications”
“Seem a lot more professional. It gives more detail which is reassuring”
“I value qualifications and the fact that the language makes it feel more serious”
How we changed the content after my content research
My hypothesis about the qualifications was wrong.
But other questions in the survey gave us a better understanding of what patients wanted to know about their therapist.
For example, we found that users wanted to see if a therapist had experience with their specific mental health issue.
So we decided to keep some of the qualifications, but change the design to highlight some of the key information.
After
✅
Keeps the level of technical detail that users found reassuring. But breaks it into chunks and highlights the details users are most interested in.
UX principle:
Authority bias
"Users attribute more importance to the opinion of an authority figure"
"The Psychology of Design", Growth.Design
Conclusion: business outcome of the research and testing
-
Aligned the design and marketing teams on the next phase of the build
-
Landing page conversions improved by 5% the month after we made these changes
-
Boots continued with the project
In the next month the service grew significantly, and Boots continued with the project.
It was tricky to isolate the impact of my content changes as we weren't able to A/B test. But there’s no doubt my research helped the team align on the next phase of the design.
We now had some guiding principles about what users wanted to know and why.