#research4

[ivana-uxui]

Notifications

One thing that I didn’t look at (with research or prototyping) were notifications. Before I had researched this, I thought of just notifications in the sense of reminders for users (for events, alarms, etc).

Eyal, N. (2015):

Good notifications are well timed (external triggers and internal triggers). By providing information when the user needs it, the app builds trust and loyalty.

Good notifications inspire action. Intended action can occur outside of the app.

Good notifications create intrigue – triggers entice users when there’s some mystery regarding what they could find.

Flaherty, K. (2015). The best way to communicate system status varies depending on several key factors

Type of information

Urgency of the information

Whether the user needs to take action from the information

Indicators

Making certain elements stand out on a page

Using icons

Type treatment

Size or animation

Characteristics:

Contextual – use proximity

Conditional – appear when needed

Passive – used as a communicational tool – no action required

Is it inappropriate:

How important is the information to the user?

How often is the information used?

Would the user expect to see the information?

Would it be missed if it weren’t provided?

Validations

Error messages related to users’ input.

Characteristics

User needs to do something to get rid of message

Contextual

Notifications

Informational messages that alert the user of general occurrences within a system. They might not be directly tied to user input, but show changes in a system.

Characteristics:

Not triggered by users’ immediate actions

Announce an event that has some significance to users.

Types:

Action required notifications

Often urgent and intrusive (update notifications)

Examples in my app:

Indicators

The current date – type treatment

Current tab user is in – colour treatment

Mood added to an entry - animation

Deleted entry/stopped alert – animation

Answered a reflective question

Validations

Deleting an entry – pop up modal

Notifications

Reminders of events – alert, pop up.

[ivana-uxui]

Low vs High Fidelity prototyping

A lot of literature and sources are out saying that low fidelity is an effective way to test with participants, but also is more feasible due to the less time spent on it.

Low Fidelity:

It can take significantly less time to create a low-fi prototype, and more time can be spent with other things and the iterative developments. It is easier to not be attached to low-fi prototypes, and people expect it to change. It puts less pressure on the participants, so they are more comfortable with being honest with their opinions on the prototype (Pernice, 2016).

High Fidelity:

However, there is an article which states that high fidelity prototypes feels more real to participants, which would allow them to act more realistically (Taylor, 2017). With high fidelity prototypes, designers can test specific UI elements. Designers can also focus on observing the test instead of worrying about running the prototype (Pernice, 2016). According to Taylor, it can also impress stakeholders, save time in communication with stakeholders and developers, and it can show the long term vision for the product. However there are some things to be wary of, the visual design might cloud opinions on the UX, and it does take longer to create.

According to Busche (2014), designers need to understand and know what they want to test, and design accordingly. This means that it could be in between low-fi and hi-fi.

I want to be able use animations to improve the Ux, and test with participants. With the time frame for this project, I want to be able to test a couple iterations of prototypes with animations, so I can develop and improve accordingly.

References:

Busche, L. (2014). The Skeptic’s Guide To Low-Fidelity Prototyping. Retrieved August 24 2018,  from https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2014/10/the-skeptics-guide-to-low-fidelity-prototyping/ Pernice, K. (2016). UX Prototypes: Low Fidelity vs. High Fidelity. Retrieved August 24 2018,  from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ux-prototype-hi-lo-fidelity/ Taylor, S. (2017). 4 Reasons to Use High Fidelity Designs Early in a UX Process. Retrieved August 24 2018,  from https://www.bitovi.com/blog/4-reasons-to-design-at-high-fidelity-early-in-a-ux-process

[ivana-uxui]

Interaction Personas

I decided to bring the personas again and visually imagine what they would look like, and imagine what the environment around them would look like, to help me make more decisions on usability.

The template is from Compagnucci (2018)

Olivia:

Dark environment - have a night/dark version to the UI?

Private - value privacy in the app

Using the app for a little longer.

Hannah:

On the move - clear UI and clear nav. Ready to quit the app and open it again.

Lots of people around - not so much private

One hand use - utilise the thumb zone

Use the app quickly

Toby:

Hiking - clear UI, but also may have spotty internet connection. So the ability of auto saving? and retrieving that information

Environment light changing - ability to change theme easily

On the move - clear UI and clear nav. Ready to quit the app and open it again.

Use the app quickly

References: Compagnucci, M. (2018). Interaction personas: why, what, and how. Retrieved August 17 2018,  from https://uxdesign.cc/interaction-personas-e24f3a958d07

[jhdesignresearch]

Lecture Research Week Four

NOTE: I feel the need to validate some of my choices throughout my research process. I realise that I have relied mostly on web and non-academic sources for this, as well as not using APA referencing throughout. I have done this because I see the research as a follow-up of something that interests me throughout the lecture, expanding my interests and depth of knowledge as a designer; not a complicated endeavour that is meant to take up an excessive amount of time.

During this lecture I was really inspired by the growth of the underground map, designing for beauty, and designing for a purpose- two things that the London underground map did not achieve until Harry Becks design. I had taken a family trip to where these maps were based, so learning about what I had seen when I was younger was also a reason as to why I was interested in knowing more. 

As the expansion of the London tube system occurred in the 1900s, designer and electrical draughtsman Harry Beck realised that an easy to read map was a priority. Becks creation would go on to become revolutionary, becoming a symbol of London itself. Instead of being like previous maps, accurate but impossible to read with a key that almost needed a degree to decipher; Beck created a design that considered the importance of form and function- something that had been previously overlooked. This design relied on his experience as an electrical draftsman Becks original map would have the clarity stemming from wiring diagrams. Previously this clarity and user-friendliness weren't achieved as the designers had become too caught up in showing the realistic distances between the stations, Beck didn’t concern himself with such things. Instead, he preferred to take the stance that the map was just an aid in facilitating a traveler to get from point A to point B. 

This revolutionary view on travel was initially rejected by the Underground’s Publicity office in 1931. Only later in 1933 did they undertake a trail version of the map, only fully getting on board with Beck’s ideas when the maps proved to be a hit with passengers. Beck continued to develop his maps for the Underground until 1959, even expanding his interests to include the Paris underground, however, this never came to fruition, only published in Becks’s book. Beck also began to have legal tribulations with the transport union itself, his name was removed from the bottom of his labour of love as well as another designer, Paul Garbutt being given the project. Beck was heartbroken, "bitter and betrayed by the very organisation he had helped, so admirably, to promote." 

Only in 1997 after Becks death was he recognised as the original designer of something that has become ingrained in London’s identity. This recognition is shown in a plaque, tube carriages being named after him as well as artistic credit for the map used today being an ‘evolution’ of his original ideas. 

Resources:

http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/beckmap.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Beck

http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/search?q=harry+beck

http://www.ltmcollection.org/museum/object/link.html?IXinv=&IXsearch=bus&_IXFIRST_=273

[meganpennycmpt-blog]

History of Domestication of Animals

8/3/16

Some of the earliest ever evidence of domesticated dogs dates back to around 12,000 years ago, a jawbone of a dog was found in a cave in Iraq which differed from a regular wolf's due to its size, shape and its amount of teeth. In Roman times, woman appear to have ‘lap dogs’ as their warmth was said to cure stomach aches. Dogs were mainly used for practical reasons in the past and selective breeding helped breed dogs so they could be used for different tasks such as farmyard/guard dogs would be bred to have black fur to frighten off thieves and trespassers.

Evidence of dogs being viewed as companions is not a very new concept even though it might seem it, one of the earliest examples is a 4 month old puppy being found with an elderly woman’s remains in Israel from 12,00BC. However during WW1&2, the amount of dogs being kept as pets hit a huge spike.

[References:

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab57  ]