City Slicker-
City Slicker-
This mobile application utilizes persuasive techniques to encourage transit use through embedded persuasion and norms of social influence. It provides a gamified experiences for people to take transportation with fun and pride.
This mobile application utilizes persuasive techniques to encourage transit use through embedded persuasion and norms of social influence. It provides a gamified experiences for people to take transportation with fun and pride.
This mobile application utilizes persuasive techniques to encourage transit use through embedded persuasion and norms of social influence. It provides a gamified experiences for people to take transportation with fun and pride.
Role
UIUX designer
UX researcher
Role
UIUX designer
UX researcher
Role
UIUX designer
UX researcher
Timeframe
4 month
Timeframe
4 month
Timeframe
4 month
Collaborators
Myself, Micheal auld, Jacob Chen, Amy Lucas, Stephanie Tseng, Serena Wang
Collaborators
Myself, Micheal auld, Jacob Chen, Amy Lucas, Stephanie Tseng, Serena Wang
Collaborators
Myself, Micheal auld, Jacob Chen, Amy Lucas, Stephanie Tseng, Serena Wang
Design Elements
Design Elements
Design Elements
Design Elements
Interfaces Design
Interfaces Design
Design Elements
Design Elements
Research and Development
Research and Development
New Metaphors:
This focus group activity was adapted from a toolkit created by the Imaginaries Lab to help participants ideate creatively around certain concepts. For the development of City Slicker, we asked participants to draw connections to concepts surrounding public transit and car alternatives.
Participants were shown a deck containing visual representations of metaphors. For each concept, participants drew connections between these concepts and the metaphors shown in the slides.
New Metaphors:
This focus group activity was adapted from a toolkit created by the Imaginaries Lab to help participants ideate creatively around certain concepts. For the development of City Slicker, we asked participants to draw connections to concepts surrounding public transit and car alternatives.
Participants were shown a deck containing visual representations of metaphors. For each concept, participants drew connections between these concepts and the metaphors shown in the slides.
How do I feel about getting somewhere without a car?
How do I feel about getting somewhere without a car?
How do I feel about public transit?
How do I feel about public transit?
Drawing connections to metaphors bolstered the insights we gained from interviews with potential users, who were annoyed by inconvenient public transportation options but still preferred walking over driving. These qualitative emotional insights helped us identify unpleasant parts of the transit experience we could target with embedded techniques.
Drawing connections to metaphors bolstered the insights we gained from interviews with potential users, who were annoyed by inconvenient public transportation options but still preferred walking over driving. These qualitative emotional insights helped us identify unpleasant parts of the transit experience we could target with embedded techniques.
Embedded Persuasion:
Public transit in the United States has bad reputation. Through our focus groups, we heard complaints that local transit options were slow, unreliable, and lacked coverage. Even if they wanted to use transit more in theory, in practice, it was not feasible.
We also needed to avoid reactance, a psychological phenomenon where explicit persuasion appeals can backfire, sometimes leading to resistance even when the person initially agreed with the desired behavior. So, we had to ask:
Embedded Persuasion:
Public transit in the United States has bad reputation. Through our focus groups, we heard complaints that local transit options were slow, unreliable, and lacked coverage. Even if they wanted to use transit more in theory, in practice, it was not feasible.
We also needed to avoid reactance, a psychological phenomenon where explicit persuasion appeals can backfire, sometimes leading to resistance even when the person initially agreed with the desired behavior. So, we had to ask:
How do we persuade users to use public transit without triggering psychological reactance?
To help mask the persuasive intent of City Slicker, we utilized two Embedded Design principles to present the application as a city exploration and self-discovery app:
How do we persuade users to use public transit without triggering psychological reactance?
To help mask the persuasive intent of City Slicker, we utilized two Embedded Design principles to present the application as a city exploration and self-discovery app:
Intermixing
Intermixing
Interweaving “on-topic” and “off-topic” content to make the former less conspicuous, and thus more approachable.
Interweaving “on-topic” and “off-topic” content to make the former less conspicuous, and thus more approachable.
Obfuscation
Obfuscation
Stealthily introducing the persuasive content or true purpose of an intervention via framing or misdirection.
Stealthily introducing the persuasive content or true purpose of an intervention via framing or misdirection.
Prototyping
Prototyping
Paper Prototyping
Paper Prototyping
To validate our concept with a Wizard-of-Oz test, we created paper screens, badges, and a model phone. Participants would think aloud, and we swapped out screens manually. We explained to participants that this was a “city exploration app,” masking our persuasive intent.
Our Questions:
· Do participants feel as though they are trying to be persuaded in a certain way?
· Does the badge system encourage users to reflect on their transit choices?
· Do seeing other users’ badges inspire a change in behavior?
Participants were given options of nearby attractions, and would choose their transportation option. Based on what they chose, they would be rewarded with the respective badge. After several participants completed the test, we asked them to reflect collectively about the choices they made.
To validate our concept with a Wizard-of-Oz test, we created paper screens, badges, and a model phone. Participants would think aloud, and we swapped out screens manually. We explained to participants that this was a “city exploration app,” masking our persuasive intent.
Our Questions:
· Do participants feel as though they are trying to be persuaded in a certain way?
· Does the badge system encourage users to reflect on their transit choices?
· Do seeing other users’ badges inspire a change in behavior?
Participants were given options of nearby attractions, and would choose their transportation option. Based on what they chose, they would be rewarded with the respective badge. After several participants completed the test, we asked them to reflect collectively about the choices they made.
Key findings: Norms of Social Influence
Key findings: Norms of Social Influence
Paper prototyping lead to a few key findings:Participants did not find badges motivating until they could discuss and compare badges during collective reflections with other participants.Participants noted that badges were probably not enough to change their behavior in their current state. Because users did not know what badges were possible to obtain at the start, receiving a new badge did not meet any prior expectation.
It was clear that the social aspect of City Slicker would be crucial to instilling a sense of value into Badges. To do this, we looked to three principles outlined in Cialdini’s Six Norms of Social Influence:
Paper prototyping lead to a few key findings:Participants did not find badges motivating until they could discuss and compare badges during collective reflections with other participants.Participants noted that badges were probably not enough to change their behavior in their current state. Because users did not know what badges were possible to obtain at the start, receiving a new badge did not meet any prior expectation.
It was clear that the social aspect of City Slicker would be crucial to instilling a sense of value into Badges. To do this, we looked to three principles outlined in Cialdini’s Six Norms of Social Influence:
Social Proof
Social Proof
People assume that their peers know the correct way to act, and they will not get chastised for acting like everyone else.
People assume that their peers know the correct way to act, and they will not get chastised for acting like everyone else.
Consistency
Consistency
People are motivated to behave consistently, in a way that does not contradict themselves.
People are motivated to behave consistently, in a way that does not contradict themselves.
Scarcity
Scarcity
The fact that something is rare or “going fast” suggests that is is desirable, playing on one’s need for uniqueness.
The fact that something is rare or “going fast” suggests that is is desirable, playing on one’s need for uniqueness.
High Fidelity Prototype
High Fidelity Prototype
Our high fidelity prototype was a fully interactive Figma prototype that users could run on their phones by scanning a QR code. This prototype test was conducted in a showcase space, where participants would roam freely and approach the table where our prototype was being run.
To take advantage of this format, we handed out paper badges correlated to the decisions participants made in-app to simulate the social aspect of the application.
Our high fidelity prototype was a fully interactive Figma prototype that users could run on their phones by scanning a QR code. This prototype test was conducted in a showcase space, where participants would roam freely and approach the table where our prototype was being run.
To take advantage of this format, we handed out paper badges correlated to the decisions participants made in-app to simulate the social aspect of the application.
Outcome
Outcome
