Skip to content

phaseII

Harsh edited this page Nov 17, 2025 · 11 revisions

Phase II: Refining interaction and designing wireframes

Introduction

The last sprint ended with wireframes and sketches that were able to support the Minimal Viable Product created by the software students. What lingered, however, was the question of what direction users would want the product to take. The main purpose of the work done in this sprint was to address the concerns provided by the individuals involved in our research and product tests.

Methods

Demo Q&A

3-4 individuals provided feedback during a live demo Q/A and Software Engineering students posted responses to Slack. The users were shown a functional app that included a functional homepage (see Homepage in wireframes).

Cognitive Walkthrough

3 People were involved in providing feedback. Testers were asked to follow the wireframe workflow while in the persona of a user. (See Kara White in personas). Each of these reviewers provided a PDF containing the actions the persona would take to reach their end goal.

Findings

Demo Q&A

Software engineers asked a class of computer science students "Would having post tags be a worthwhile addition to improve searches at the cost of having the user enter more info at post creation." The students stated that multiple users defining the same tags can get confusing, so users would need an existing set of tags while also having the power of creating their own tags. Furthermore, tags should not case sensitive, and contain no special characters. Students also requested predefined categories for skills (tech, agriculture, household chores, small tasks, etc); recommended skills to be weighed by difficulty and how proficient the task can be completed; and expressed desire for a credit system to handle some sort of currency when swapping skills for nothing in return.

Cognitive Walkthrough

Through cognitive walkthroughs, we learned of some possible roadblocks that users might encounter.

Some users expressed that they believed the arrow buttons on our home screen would show posts from different accounts or cycle through contact info.

“By clicking on the arrows, I assume that there will be new posts from a different account”

When creating a post, users stated they would like to be notified that their post was really posted.

“[It] would be nice to see whether she’s told that she’s successfully posted”

Conclusions

We discovered that some things in our designs could be more direct and that there are some key things that we can add to make the final design appealing to users to use. There are still some more things we need to add to really try and balance the system out for users who do not want a skill in return and create a way for us to categorize skills and their difficulty. We would need to allocate space in the wireframe and the final UI design for tags, categories, difficulty, tokens, and confirmation messages. Furthermore, we should reconsider how posts are displayed and scrolled to make the user interface easier to understand.

Caveats

Our research included highly limited user feedback and little actual data. A lot of our feedback came from students who are still learning about user experience, but are also more aware than most users. In the future we will look to collect more data from actual potential users and people outside the class.

Clone this wiki locally