#evaluation3

Stats:

Maybe have a section about how many entries are entered?

A way for easily entering another variable.

Having another section/or a piece that would allow participants to read or understand what they see on the app in a simple way.

Add entry:

Look at checklist icon and automation.

Collage:

possibly give participants an option to see images that the app recommends based on their voice input. 

Seek out for a more real prototype.

Testing:

Outline the goals of the app in the survey or the session so the participants can asses on their own.

Prototype/structure:

Have multiple ways of searching. Have side scroll for date

Have multiple ways of repeating the note? Be more clear with instructions

Bringing in the personas again...

I tend to forget the personas and what their motivations, fears, etc. are, so I decided to bring them back again and see if I’ve done things to combat some problems I’ve outlined at the start of this project. I do know that the project has slightly evolved due to some revelations from user testing and such, but I want to know if I’ve covered what I set out to achieve.

Motivations and Behaviours

“I want my journal to look as ‘me’ as possible”

There is a personalisation feature (colour and font)

“I’d like a way for me to understand how I feel and see trends over time”

There is the stats feature - will need to look at this further though.

“I want to see how busy I am”

Dots are the only way of representing to see how many entries are done over time. Maybe have a section about how many entries are entered?

“I want to be able to open this app and add in entries easily.”

There is the add note button for easy access, on the bottom nav bar.

“I want to be able to integrate my contacts and other apps to this app”

There is a syncing process to be able to tag contacts when making events.

“I want to remember how I feel about certain events”

There is a mood tracker for events.

“I want to be able to keep track of places I’ve been to”

There is an atlas

Environmental Requirements:

Users will be using this app most likely in short bursts during the day (and night), rather than using it for longer duration per use, so the app will need to allow to be opened and closed without disrupting the information/flow of the app.

Results to the hypotheses:

Add entry – the interactions and the layout between switching.

Hypothesis: Having the format toolbar on the same screen as where the keyboard is will be less cumbersome to users compared to having it on a separate plane

Result: There were a lot less trouble with having the toolbar on the same plane as the keyboard. participants took less time (me measuring by eye) to complete the task. However there were some issues and problems with the checklist as the icon isn’t clear enough, and some automated actions such as tapping enter should automatically bring up a checklist. I got rid of the other formatting (bullet points, numbers) for the sake of simplicity, and no one seemed to notice it.

To work on: Checklist icon and automation.

Collage – Features – microphone, collage feature, image search

Hypothesis: Adding a microphone feature will prompt for different ways for data input.

Adding a collage and image feature will also prompt an interesting way to collect users’ data.

Result: The microphone input was interesting, however it was hard to get an idea of what users thought of it because it didn’t feel real enough.

Result: The collage idea received good reception from the users. However, the search idea did trip up some users, but they did get used to the search feature once they’ve done it before. The prototype model was a bit challenging to show the participants about how it would work because instead of direct manipulation, they had to tap on the screen – so there was a disconnect to the real thing due to the limitation of the software.

To work on: possibly give participants an option to see images that the app recommends based on their voice input. Seek out for a more real prototype.

Stats – Adding a way for users to track what they want on the graph

Hypothesis: Users can draw conclusions (on their own) from the graph.

Result: Participants didn’t really draw any conclusions from the graph. After explaining the point of the graph, they thought it was a good idea. I think translating something visual to something understandable is challenging.

To work on: having another section/or a piece that would allow participants to read or understand what they see on the app in a simple way.

Personalisation – Adding a way for users to change the colour and the fonts of the app

Hypothesis: Users will feel that the personalisation in this app is accounted for.

Results: participants did not comment about personalisation in the survey.

To work on: Probably outline the goals of the app in the survey or the session so the participants can asses on their own.

Syncing Account – Showing the process of syncing

Hypothesis: Giving a more realistic version of what it’s like to sync accounts

Results: Participants did not comment on this. 

To work on: Nothing – I think that the participants knew how the syncing process works in real life, so the one in the app is sufficient enough.

Difficulty of Tasks:

Most of the tasks in the apps were just right to too easy for the participants. Because the participants that I have tested on this round were the same (for the most part, 80% were the same) I think that they had to compare this app from last week’s version, hence the ‘easier’ opinion. It was interesting to see that the more complicated (ie more features) task were closer to the difficult opinion (relative to the other ones). This was good news to me, because again, if there is a feature that is decked out, I don’t necessarily want it to be ‘too easy’ because that would mean that it is too simple/boring. 

This is up for interpretation so other people might have different ideas on this. However, because I asked the same question last week, it is really easy for me to see if I have improved or not with the iteration (and I have improved!)

Usability Scale:

The positive statements “I can learn to use this app,” “I was confident using this app,” etc, were towards the Agree end, which was good to see. The only thing that was a bit controversial (lack for a better word) was the “I need instructions to use this app.” A lot mentioned that after using the app, they would understand, but they would need an explanation.

Because this is a user-centred app, I’d like to hope that they wouldn’t need any explanation to use the app. So this is something that I think I need to work on. having the balance of on screen assistance, but not going overboard. Having intuitive icons and features without having to overly explain the functions is going to be difficult.

Favourite Features:

Participants mentioned that they enjoyed the tacking and the collage aspect of the app. This is good to hear because I feel like this some features that pull me apart from other current journal and planner apps at the moment.

Notes from the observation:

Some specific trip ups that participants experienced:

When people were trying to find a specific date, they kept scrolling horizontally (this did not work) 

How to fix this: Have multiple ways of searching. Have side scroll (am limited by prototyping software!)

When saving to repeat, I think people have a mental model of how this was supposed to work (doing this outside of the note) and the conceptual model did not match what participants were thinking.

How to fix this: Have multiple ways of repeating the note? Be more clear with instructions

Adding a note, the “add you reflection today” notification that participants thought were the “add a note” button.

How to fix this: I think, making the distinction between a journal entry and a note is important. Currently they are two different things. One is a template and the other is more of a blank canvas. I think this, or focus on using technology to improve data entry methods? Have a separate part for reflective questions? Look into proper reflective questions?

When adding a variable - participants did not understand this very well. The dots weren’t a good enough indication of further action

Testing:

I had tested on participants using the updated prototype that I made. Unlike last time, I was lucky that the phone version of the prototype was able to work for all of the session, which gave a more accurate physical experience.

Again, I tried not to lead the user or direct them too much, as the task sheet outlined the tasks, and the hotspots also showed the user what to click on to advance. I did notice that some users kept tapping on parts of the screen where it was not meant to be clicked on (even though hotspots told them otherwise). There was also a participant that kept tapping on the screen to see the hotspot, instead of thinking about where to tap.

I think that instead of using the same people to test, I’d try to aim to find new people. However this will largely depend on time, and what software I’d be using for prototyping.

I tried to emulate some scenarios of ways for actual users using the app. For example, I got a participant to walk while using the app, I got some to talk to the phone as if it were recording what they were saying.

Raw Data:

                                EVALUATION QUESTION 3