Usability Test

User testing was conducted with two different prototypes to research possible preferences between distinct functionalities that would shape the final iteration.

The primary goal of the usability test was to clarify which level of traditional planning was preferred within a family setting. The assumption that no planning was necessary, was represented by the radar concept where family members do things together entirely based on opportunities that arise in the moment. The planning concept incorporated a minimum of planning functionality: Letting the users agree on only a day for a gettogether. Secondary objectives of the user test were to obtain feedback on interactive elements such as the cognition-based feedback and feedforward represented by the pointing LEDs of the LED ring, the colors, the bumping surface - including the animation that conveyed agreement - and the charging of the family bond. The ability to hide oneself from the system was also investigated. The complete testing protocols can be found in Appendix E and F.

Fig.10: Usability test

Findings

The experiments were recorded, transcribed (Appendix G) and important feedback was extracted. In order to make sense of this qualitative data, the “download method” was applied (IDEO [2], 2018). The essence of the method is to group obtained knowledge by themes in order to spot patterns in the data.

Fig.11: Spotting patterns using the download method

The findings can be found in Appendix H. The main points were summarized below. • Planning: Gave the user a sense of control and could be perceived as a rewarding checklist. If planning functionality was included, it should be more specific. Only picking the day was not adequate.

Planning one week ahead was sufficient. • Doing things together in the moment: Showed how convenient it can be to do something together.

Added value was questioned since awareness of presence of family members was thought to already exist. • Charging the family bond by bringing the devices together: The idea was well received but the continuous motivation was questioned. Furthermore, the charge received when not doing the chore themselves was perplexing to the users. They don’t understand the concept of also receiving a charge when someone else has done a chore. • Stationary or portable device: The general consensus is that the device should be portable, perhaps a wearable. This also points to the questionable motivation of bringing the device. • Privacy: Regarding the radar concept, users express a desire to hide themselves. Muting chores does not make sense.

Conclusion

The user tests showed that there was no preferred way of planning in a family setting. Both setting time aside and doing things together in the moment made sense. However, planning should be more specific and seeing the position of family members in real time raised questions of privacy and actual value of this functionality. Therefore the decision was to move forward and incorporate more specific planning tools, since there was no strong indication that the concept of interacting in the moment needs to be captured as functionality in the device. It could exist alongside a planning tool.

The question of representing the status of the family bond as a visible charge was a divisive one. On the one hand, it was intended as a motivator for bringing family members together as the charge decreased, but in the current implementation it was questionable whether it would work as intended. It was clear that in order to keep it, it should be refined. Based on the fact that the current implementation was perceived as perplexing, the fact that relying on extrinsic motivation can be problematic in the long term (Schultheiss et al., 2012) and that the concept is perceived to be able to add sufficient value without this element, it is decided to remove this element going forward. This also implies that an option to mute the device is not required.

QUOTES FROM PARTICIPANTS

“All I know now is that we have a “thing” on wednesday - I don’t know what, I don’t know when.” - Participant 3

“I question myself if I would look at it that often. I know who is in the house.” - Participant 4

“I don’t care about the charging. Maybe the first 10 times, but charging loses value.” - Participant 3

“Using this as a planner works being a portable thing. I would pick this up. It’s like bringing my agenda to a meeting.” - Participant 2

“Being a twelve year old girl I would walk sneak around. I don’t want my parents to always know. It would be nice to not been seen.” - Participant 2