People are born adventurers: trailblazing through the woods, trekking across the desert, ever-climbing to higher places. Without navigation or certainty of their surroundings however, people cannot accomplish these feats. The life of a hiker is one that is filled with many inconveniences that negatively impact people’s experiences in the wild. Of these problems, one of the most ubiquitous is the lack of a reliable way to navigate on the trails. This problem affects hikers of all experience levels and often prevents outdoor enthusiasts from exploring and going out on new trails for fear of getting lost on an unfamiliar path. Another issue is the inability to have questions about local wildlife answered when out in the wild alone. This inhibits the level of interaction that people have with their environment while out on the trails. Thus, we set out to design a better hiking experience for all to improve their time in nature.
Hiking Complications
At the start of the project journey, I thought the problem was something else it turned out to be based on my observations. I was so focused on what I wanted the solution to be that I was blinded by what the problem is. Designing a solution without a problem led me to a dead-end and to a point where I had to stop and properly assess the issue I was trying to fix. Teaming up with Rudy and Eric allowed me to gain a broader insight into what I was trying to solve. Before we started working together we formulated ground rules - some were silly but most were laid out so that we all had a clear understanding of what we each wanted to get out of the project.
To help find out what the problem was, we started to conduct contextual inquiries. What we learnt from this process was that CIs are not for content generation, but for problem-seeking (what do users have problems with currently?). The people that we wanted our product to focus on were the participants that we should have included in our CIs. We ensured that we fixed this by performing a few other CIs with people who would be using our products when it is completed. During our analysis of the CIs, we targeted tasks that our participants had a problem with. Most of them turned out to be medium/hard difficulty and this helped us to find what we wanted to focus on. After finding out the problems and issues hikers had, we shifted gears into designing a solution that could assist in solving these issues.
Design your hike the right way
The design process was the one I enjoyed the most. This is because I got the chance to experiment with several designs (smartwatches, mobile apps, laptops, desktops etc) and pick the one that will be most valuable based on pros and cons. Among the tasks we found during the CIs, we chose two that we would focus on: navigation and identification. I wanted to ensure that our design was able to properly solve the issues that our participants had when it came to navigating the wild as well as identifying their favourite tree.
At the start of the project, the team wanted to implement a solution that used AR glasses. During the design process, we realized that our expectations that we had regarding the AR glasses did not meet reality. At this stage, we realized that making AR glasses would maybe not be the best way to solve the problem. This was because AR glasses would be additional hardware that our users will have to purchase. For those who cannot afford such an expensive product, it would reduce how much users we would be able to reach. Instead, we chose to implement a mobile application. This is because a mobile app will be able to serve the same purpose and would be accessible to a wider audience. Most people have smartphones and we would, therefore, be able to capture the audience we need easier. After selecting our preferred device, we started to design prototypes for it.
Prototype
In my opinion, making the prototype was the most tedious process. This is because I had to go through several iterations of designs I thought were great at the time. However, this thought changed when I tested the design and realized that certain features were not the best way to implement the solution. Our changes started with the paper prototype. During the heuristic evaluations, we were able to catch initial flaws with our paper prototype. One of the main problems was that there was no back button (how did we forget a back button?!). Other issues ranged from identification focal points as well as confusing navigation icons. Taking the feedback from the evaluations, the team and I made several adjustments to our paper prototype before heading into the usability testing. During these tests, we made our participants perform two tasks that were focused around navigation and identification. During each test, we changed the task to make it more specific and less open to our participant’s opinions. We learned new things about our design based on responses during these tests. Some participants clicked buttons that were not meant to be clicked while others misused features to do other things we did not expect. This allowed us to make changes to the design such as adding error messages, detail screens, user ratings as well as improved identification camera features. After completing the paper prototypes, we made our digital mock-ups using Balsamiq. This process was enjoyable because we got to do interactive prototyping and use your application as if it were an actual mobile app without having to constantly shift papers around.
The process of prototyping differentiated across the different modalities. Each paper prototype test changed to include more specific questions. The tests with the more specific questions were more illuminating because it allowed us to focus on specific tasks that the user would go on our app to do. This allowed us to modify our design to provide a smoother experience. However, during our digital mock-up, this modality different from the paper prototypes because we did not ask the user to do tasks and make changes based observation. Instead, changes to the design were done based on what the designers thought looked more aesthetically pleasing.
Main Design Points
During the project, I found 7 points that were cruicial and beneficial to the project’s success:
1. Teamwork makes the dream work
The most valuable pieces of the project were the time that we spent working together, trying to figure out how to make things work. I learnt a lot about working together as a team in completing a project. Teamwork is one of the most valuable pieces to completing any problem or project. When I think about completing a project of this complexity on my own, I do not see how it could be possible due to the number of tasks needed. The team was there from the start to the end: brainstorming ideas, sharing silly jokes, coming up with designs and analysing feedback as we strived to make our product better.
2. Limitations
There were several limitations to the design process. This came from the initial processes when we were trying to define the problem correctly. It was difficult to set up some of the CIs because we had to ensure that our schedules matched our participants and find time to meet with them. There were a few limitations to the design process. This was mostly because none of the team members had experience in UX/designing and so it was a steep learning curve for all of us. We did what we thought was best and learned and adjusted as we went through the iterative process. Lastly, another limitation that we had was coming to an agreement when we had contrasting feedback. Say someone said that doing one thing is best but another person said that doing the complete opposite is best, we had to figure out a middle ground that could make both sides work
3. Challenges and Lessons
During the design process, I felt as if the Contextual Inquiry was the most challenging. This is because we went into it thinking that we should make a solution that fits all users (beginner, intermediate and advanced). After getting feedback on our CIs, I realized that it would be best to focus on a specific group of users and observe them to get a proper problem statement. Doing this allowed us to be able to analyse and interpret the problem better. I also learnt that focusing on beginners/intermediates first is often better because you get the chance to start small and solve simpler problems. Advanced users will want advanced solutions and if you can start small, you can then properly scale up to fit the needs of those users.
4. Test Test Test
I never started to realize the importance of testing until reading about the articles of products failing and costing lives. The Therac-25 is an example of a product that should’ve been tested more robustly to reduce the effects that it had. Another example of this is the Uber case where their self-driving car killed a pedestrian while it was out on the road. Testing is very important when building a product. Especially something that can cost lives because humans weren’t born to be test subjects. Companies need to ensure that testing is their number one task before releasing a product to the public
5. Simple Is Better
One of the heuristic evaluations that I like the most is the Aesthetic and minimalist design. I like this the most because when I look for a visually pleasing design, I always like to see designs that are simple and straightforward. Complex designs often distract me from the task that I use the product for. This is why I believe that simple is better because it allows me to stay focused on what I want from the product, and it also allows me to finish my tasks quickly. We simplified our design throughout the processes to come to a navigation system that revolved around the main screen for navigation and a single icon at the bottom for identification.
6. Design for One, Design for All
Something that will always stick to me is when my professor, Iris Howley, gave the example of building a ramp for wheelchair accessibility. Using this ramp can also help users that aren’t disabled because it allows them to carry suitcases or trolleys up elevated areas easier. This to me is the perfect example of design for one, design for all. After thinking about accessibility, I thought of ways in which our app can be designed for all. One of the main features I came up with is a voice navigation system for people with low vision. This will easily guide our users to their destination. This feature could also help users who prefer not to check their phones out in the wild.
8. Ethics behind Safety
When creating an application or product, you must ensure that your users are safe while using it. In our app specifically, users can navigate and identify things out in the wild. Safety is one of our number one criteria. As ACM ACM says, “A computing professional has an additional obligation to report any signs of system risks that might result in harm. If leaders do not act to curtail or mitigate such risks, it may be necessary to “blow the whistle” to reduce potential harm. However, capricious or misguided reporting of risks can itself be harmful. Before reporting risks, a computing professional should carefully assess relevant aspects of the situation.” (ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct) We have to ensure that when our users use our app to better their hiking experience, they leave and return to their starting point feeling safe and out of danger. We should ensure that we present safety precautions to ensure that our users are presented with information that is not biased or altered in any way to affect their mental or physical health.
Conclusion of my hiking trip
Overall, this project was a very enjoyable one for me. I am very happy that I got the opportunity to take part in this class and project. In future cases, I will use the lessons learnt over this semester to help impact the projects I engage myself in. The whole design process not only taught me new things but also improved the knowledge that I knew before. I enjoyed everything I did in each design stage regardless of if it was tedious or not. The participants and prospective users that I interacted with were very corporative and I had a great time telling them about the project and working with them to improve it. The class discussions and articles that I read impacted the project significantly and I am grateful that I had access to those materials to help me along the way. Lastly, meeting with the team every week was something I looked forward to and I was lucky to have a team like this one. I hope the same happens with the teams I have in the future because it would make my design life smoother and more enjoyable.
Bibliography
Huff & Brown. 2004. “A Case Study of the Therac-25,” in Using History to Teach Computer Science and Related Disciplines https://hci-hikar.firebaseapp.com/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2018/03/19/uber-halts-autonomous-vehicle-testing-after-a-pedestrian-is-struck/ https://ethics.acm.org/