UX Research
2022
Vibe Check
About
Valid user research process upon the group travel planning topic, generated many thoughtful insights and final solution
Role
Overview
- Prompt
The User-Centered Research and Evaluation (UCRE) course initiated the research topic of travel. In a team of five, we did background research respectively and narrowed down our research scope.
- What's the problem?
When traveling in groups...
It's easy to get overwhelmed by the information overload of trip planning
It's easy to get frustrated when not everyone's preferences are considered
It's also easy to get stunned by the unexpected emergencies
So…
How might we reduce anxiety & friction and inject spontaneity in group trip planning?
Approach
Research
- Overview
We began by selecting contextual interview methods and establishing our interview protocol guide. We decided that a combination of directed storytelling, artifact analysis, and semi-structured interview would be best for our project goal.
We then sourced five participants who fit the criteria we’ve previously established and proceeded to conduct each contextual interview in groups of 2 (Interviewer & Notetaker).
We then summarized concepts from each interview to produce interpretation notes that cover key points we surfaced. Using the notes, we conducted affinity diagramming as a team to synthesize and model our findings.
- Key Questions
[Directed Storytelling] We’d love to hear about the most memorable trip that you went on with a group. We asked you to bring some pictures from the trip, could you share those as you talk about your experience?
[Artifact Analysis] Can you show us some pictures in this trip?
From your experience, which factor of travel planning becomes most important when traveling with many people?
Have you had any bad experiences when it comes to group travel or group travel planning?
- Quote
- Analysis & Synthesis
First Affinity Clustering
Second Affinity Clustering
- Insights
(a) Unplanned, unexpected enjoyment is great
(b) First-hand information/social proof is helpful
(c) Group decision-making is challenging
(d) Helpful when 1 or 2 leaders to do the initial filtering
(e) Voting on activities is an appealing idea
Ideation
Focused on the "how might we" question, we generated a variety of ideas by doing the Crazy 8's activity
- Storyboard
(1) Taking burden of decision-making away from user
(From left to right, represent a higher social boundary risk)
(2) Find nearby options for the destinations they want to visit
(3) Find a common ground of preferences
(4) Find a common ground of preferences
(5) Center ideation around themes by setting a focal point
- Speed Dating
We recruited 5 participants to react to our storyboards, mainly to test the feasibility of the ideas and the risk.
- Findings
Overview of Findings & Insights
(a) All participants are comfortable with algorithms determining viable options during group trip planning, but only if they still have authority to give the final confirmation.
(b) Most participants are averse to giving permission to technology that may have the potential of overreaching their perceived personal boundaries.
(c) Most participants agreed that automating the processes of trip planning could relieve stress.
(d) Some participants saw a potential in Augmented Reality for suggesting nearby alternatives.
Common Misunderstandings
The assumption about all users being excited about indicating their preferences.
Validated Insights & Ideas
(a) Users prefer quick ways to organize information to make a decision based on their preferences
(b) Gathering metadata from social media to give personalized suggestions
(c) Compromise is acceptable if everyone’s needs are met one way or another
Design
- Parallel Prototyping
We each created a low-fidelity prototype to mock up the flow. The most plausible ones were selected and pieced together into a final low-fidelity prototype.
- Why?
Instead of designing and discussing a design solution together, we prefer to increase the design possibility by parallel prototyping.
- User Flow
- Iteration 1
- Iteration 2
Final Design
01 Invite friends
By inviting friends, the user needs to enter the email address of their friends. Then the host sets the time duration that they'd love to enjoy.
02 Preview & Select
A page where users can switch between preview and select, also allows users to set indoor or outdoor preferences. By clicking the theme category, users can easily view the reference activity image.
03 Calculate votes & Show results
After one user casts votes, the system will initiate the calculation procedure and displays the process as well as the final results.
Usability Test
- Feedback - Advantages
(a) All participants saw the potential of automated trip planning, and agreed that it would ultimately save time and mental energy. Participants cited travel times, destination proximity, and daily scheduling as tasks that took excessive mental energy that could be streamlined with algorithms
(b) Some participants saw potential in Augmented Reality for suggesting nearby alternatives
- Feedback - Suggestion
(a) Taking advantage of the fact that the travel partners stay together is crucial. Participants mentioned the invite step - invite friends by entering email addresses, was not intuitive enough when they stayed together
(b) The Instagram-style stories were not what they expected to see - what they expected is relevant specific plans with descriptive words. If the function of the story was just to further explain the description, then they thought it was not necessary because the word alone was clear enough
(c) They would like to have some substitute plans (actually incorporated in the earlier iteration) to help the team finally make the decision.
Takeaways
Some interview questions actually inquire about the same topic, which could be avoided
Also, the research, as well as the design process, is never linear, but back and forth, as we defined the problem, and we tried to ideate, finally back to redefine. The discussion and reflection in between are the most significant