Review of another groups project

At the workshop after Critique session 7 we got to review the prototype done by group 18 and they did a review of our prototype (the link to their blog with the review: https://dh2628group18.wordpress.com/ ). We discussed their project and prototype based on the critique aspects of the paper by Bardzell.

Structure

Schedule:

- Different placing of the weekly schedule, up or down depeding on what view was shown, felt inconsequent.

- Size of the schedule bar is a bit too big since no text can be shown, only the icons.

- When is the activity arranged? Why can I choose a day without reference to when it is arranged.

- Does activities overlap?

Activities view:

- Missing host of the activity.

- Why is the icon clickable.

- Where is the schedule? and how do I add the activity to the schedule.

Header:

- Back and hamburger-menu should have their positions switched to conform to standard.

Start page:

- Interaction around “expand button” feels illogical since it links to the map menu and the list of activities and not a longer list.

Filter?:

- Do the user find filter preferences under profile?

- what are “recommendations” based on? Does it learn from your previously attended events?

Activity Flow:

- Show times of the activity in the view.

Add new:

- Who can add a new activity?

Events:

- How do the user buy tickets or book a spot to an activity?

- Link to host and/or ticketservice?

- Security and money transfer?

Profile:

- Do the user have to be a real person?

Notifications:

- Are there any notifications? When, how and what kind?

Emotional:

- Grey, cold start. The map feels warm.

- Low level of commitment felt by us as users.

- The app felt a bit inconsequent, with how things were linked and the schedule moving around.

- The menu feels like it is a lot of colour compared with the rest of the colour scheme.

- The app felt empty rather than clean. Might be due to little elements missing such as time in the list of activities (mentioned above) or a community feeling.

- It doesn’t feel very unique, since to plan events via the app also could be done via a computer. Why use the app instead? Is there any community?

Moral/ethics

What sort of activities are allowed? Unethical organizations?

Expert

Not known.

Other known works

meetup, Google calendar, Facebook events, are dealing in the same area as this app.

History

- Dangers of gatherings of people (suffragette, work unions etc.), organized activities (voluntary work, non-profit etc.).

- Socialite; the user show where they have been.

- Often want to sync with friends to do activities together.

- The ability to connect with people after an activity.

- Stressful, with having a schedule to follow, if the user is getting emails or notifications it could heighten stress.

- hobby/interests groups arrange meetups.

Theories

- Social; it is a cultural thing in society. The need to be able to to get in contact

- To show others what you have done.

+ Encourages users to be active

+ Encourage users to try new things and activities.

+ Free commercial for companies that hosts activities

+ Make users get in contact with companies through an activity.

Creator

Focus: The 8graders focus for the app was to not be bored and get activities recommended based on weather, but not saying how/when it should be used. The students evolved it to be able to plan activities in a longer time span, to not be bored. The focus is on the user getting alternatives of activities to do. The social aspects in doing activities are not central in the app.

The aim is to find activities and sort them into the schedule.

Consumer

Not specified, other than people who are bored and want to find activities. Fits many, but is not adapted to some specific group.

Social context

See theories. Since consumers are not specified it doesn’t say any of the gender or class.

The design is minimalistic.

One app for everything.