Think Aloud Group Summary

Think aloud summary

We had a group discussion where we discussed the weak and strong points of our product based on the think aloud evaluations.

The product that we have decided to go with is a high fidelity prototype of a mobile application. This prototype was made with fluidui.

Link to the clickable prototype: https://www.fluidui.com/editor/live/preview/p_gwZEcD7z7s2BGR7FP2Znz7iPIEnFf7Mx.1462137625973

Weak points

Most of the testers seemed to think that the first page needed some kind of button or information on what to do, since by design that page is waiting for the user to tap it so the program can proceed. During our discussions we came to the conclusion that we should put some kind of time limit on that first page, so that for example after 3 seconds the program will proceed automatically. The reason we decided against a button on the first page is that we want the users to immediately get the feeling that the application is well designed and simple to use there is also the fact that the rest of the layout of the application is deliberately made simplistic and this is something we feel should be kept consistent throughout the usage of the application.

Some of the testers commented on the fact that the application does not seem to take into account the current position of the user when presenting available restaurants or other activities. This is a feature that our group did think about and now that it has been pointed out to us it seems like it’s a given that a service with our target group should indeed have such a feature.

All of the testers commented on the fact that there where not enough options to filter the given recommendations and that they would have really liked the possibility to customize their experience a bit more. This is something that really surprised us, since we thought that the idea of setting up a profile or filling in preferences would take care of this but as we saw most people just skipped past that part. But referencing the ten usability heuristics principles this actually makes sense. So what this feedback from the testers is telling us is that our application is lacking in the principles "User control and freedom" and "flexibility and efficiency of use" even though there is a feature for entering in ones preferences.Given this rather peculiar situation we came up with a few solutions. First one easy fix is that we could just remove the skip option and force the users to go through the setup when they use the application for the first time. But robbing the user of choice is perhaps not the best choice since it would violate one of the usability principles and this entire course is based around creating a service that is user centered, instead maybe we discussed the possibility of removing this part entirely and replacing it with filters for the different sub sections as the users asked for. Such a design choice would also be consistency with the idea of simplicity that we are going for with this project.

There where some complaints about the fact that there was a no macro back button that immediately transfers the user back to the main screen without the application having to scroll through all the previous pages. This was also something that we had missed completely and when it was pointed out felt like it was a completely valid complaint, but upon further contemplation we found that it is actually not that easy of a thing to add. The reason for this is that we feel like adding another button would make the navigation bar look cluttered and disrupt the current layout a bit too much. This is a point that we as a group must discuss further on before we can come up with a final answer. The main reason for our dilemma is the fact that we have to prioritize two different key principles in the usability heuristics against each other.

Some concern about the label for the “Entertainment” section was also voiced by a few of the testers, they felt as though that label was not clear enough, while others felt like the labels where clear and intuitive. This is another point on which we could not decided what to do yet and need it discuss it further within the group and maybe even evaluate it further so we can make a decision based on more data.

Strong points

Almost all of the testers commented on how easy to use and intuitive the menus are and how simplistic yet powerful the application is. This is something that we did a lot of internal testing on and we where really happy to hear this since a lot of effort has been put into achieving this effect. The fact that all of the testers maneged to complete their tasks rather fast and without any of us doing anything to prep them or even having any kind of tutorial, tells us that all that time spent on thinking about how to group the information and what our target group would want out of the application has really payed of. This also tells us that the service does not put a heavy load on the users memory or mind at all.

Most of the testers thought that we made really good use of the screen real-estate in that we did not clutter the pages that the users come in contact with, and this is also one of the reasons that we have had difficulty in deciding if we want to add a macro back button as mentioned earlier or not.

There where also some positive reactions to the fact that the locations of night clubs are shown on a map, something that shows that the feature regarding localization of the user is truly something that we should implement as discussed earlier.