Validating and developing concept ideas
In our last post, we created a toolkit of eight initial concepts based on the Engagement cycle. These concepts are a step towards a future in which DPIC can become a map that guides learners in their journey to more knowledge and investment in the death penalty.
Moving forward, we needed to test those concepts with learners! To do so, we conducted concept testing and iterated on our solutions based on their feedback. Further, to continue building out this toolkit, we brainstormed even more ideas with the DPIC team in Washington, DC, at our Collaborative Brainstorming session.
Testing concepts
In order to evaluate the value of our concepts, we decided to conduct concept testing with people that were representative of the archetypes we have identified. The breakdown of participants is outlined below:
12 total participants
- 5 Casual Information Seekers: People from a range of ages and backgrounds who have had very little exposure to death penalty information.
- 3 Concerned Curious Learners: People who already have a baseline interest in social justice, criminal justice, or legal systems but might not have specific death penalty expertise.
- 3 Dedicated Thought Influencers: Experts in the death penalty space that are highly knowledgeable and have worked closely with death penalty information.
- 2 People from Analogous Domains: A data visualizer and an activist.
We then tested the validity, interpretability, and value of each concepts by showing them our concept sketches and asking them to think aloud through some of the following key questions:
- What do they think is the purpose of the concept?
- Is it a valuable concept for them?
- Would they use the concept? Why or why not?
For each concept we also included follow up questions such as clarifications on whether or not certain features are helpful to them or how they might prefer for an interaction to look like. At the end of the interview, we asked people to rank the concepts based on the value they saw for themselves. These were the overall ranking results:
- (Tie) Death Penalty in a Nutshell & Death Penalty 101
- (Tie) Chatbot Assistant & What Will Happen to Morgan?
- Choose Your Own Adventure
- Interactive Dashboard
- Login tool
- Value-Based Polling
Noteworthy takeaways
Some noteworthy takeaways from concept testing are that in general, people are drawn to concepts that:
- Are easy to understand and straightforward
- Encourage interactive experimentation
- Have approachable content at first glance
Common concerns
On the other hand, some common concerns and barriers to buy-in for these concepts include:
- Content feeling too pushy and intimidating
- People not knowing how to use the concept
- Overly simplified information could lead to misinterpretations
- People don’t want to spend too long onboarding onto an experience
Iterating based on feedback
With this feedback in mind, we decided to create some low fidelity prototypes that would combine and contextualize some of these ideas. We also added new elements in accordance to the feedback we received.
Death penalty 101 and interactive game prototype
Our first prototype combines our death penalty 101 learning module and interactive game concepts. From our research, we learned that for fairly complex topics like prosecturial misconduct, step-by-step learning modules are helpful. In addition, we learned that the interactive game was seen as a powerful tool for helping to humanize issues with death penalty application. Because of these pieces of information, we combined these two concepts into one.
Interactive Dashboard Prototype
Our second prototype iterates on our interactive dashboard concept by clearly showing how the map and statistics would change when users toggle with the different factors provided on the right side of the screen. In our concept testing, people thought the idea of a visual representation of data would be helpful, but weren’t sure how the factors would actually physically be represented. We thus iterated on our prototype to clearly reflect this.
Notepad and research tool prototype
Our third prototype iterates on our login concept a few different ways. The first way is by incorporating a “notepad” feature that allows users to record notes on the information they find on DPIC’s website and save it for future use. This iteration was because our research indicated that more experienced users look for and save specific pieces of information for future use.
The second way is by incorporating an “alerts” section in the user’s login which allows people to follow specific terms. Our interviews with experts earlier in spring semester made it clear that experts are using creative ways of keeping up with new information in the death penalty space like using google search term alerts or even just refreshing DPIC’s website everyday. Iterating on the login concept by adding this alerts section makes it more useful and directly applicable for expert users.
Collaborative brainstorming
After concept testing, we wanted to diverge and explore more solutions and iterate on existing concepts. We wanted DPIC’s input as well so we decided to hold a Collaborative Brainstorming Session so we can co-create ideas.
We started with a short presentation on how we used a learning Engagement Cycle to create our concepts and described the result of our concept testing. Using the Engagement Cycle and concept testing results as inspiration, we spent some time individually ideating with a Crazy 4’s ideation activity.
Afterwards everyone shared their ideas and placed them where they thought they would go on the Engagement Cycle. During this discussion alot of new ideas were formed as a result of building upon others’ ideas.
Using all these new concept we created and the existing concepts, we conducted an activity to map these concept to our learning journey strategy. As a reminder our learning journey strategy was developed from realizing how current learners in the death penalty space fall on a scale of amount of knowledge and investment in the death penalty. Our strategy is to progress learners so they both are more invested and more knowledgeable about the death penalty.
The goal of our activity was to understand where concepts fit in the learning journey and which concepts seem to be the most effective in each archetype in their learning journey. In order to do this we split up into two teams, and mapped the journey of each archetype represented by a charecter with specific needs. For each character each team determined how far they wanted their character to move and then picked 3–4 concepts to get them there. Then we discussed and compared what each team put and why.
From this activity we learned that:
- Casual Information Seekers and Concerned Curious Learners need similar forms of content but at different degrees of depth and breadth due to different levels of investment
- Casual Information Seekers and Concerned Curious Learners solutions need to be malleable to different learning styles & time constraints
- Along with producing information, Dedicated Though Influencer could also benefit from using tools to share knowledge and evaluate their impact.
- The current mental model is that everyone comes from a google search, but how can we expand to other awareness channels & continue people’s journeys on DPIC no matter where they come from.
- Currently Casual Information Seekers journeys’ feel more linear (people read then drop off). How can we keep people engaged no matter where they land on the DPIC site?
- DPIC’s assumptions is that it is easier to increase knowledge than investment.
- Case studies are perceived to be a powerful tool to teach issues because they are personal, direct, humanizing, could be visual, potential to be interactive, customizable based on issue, state etc.
Next steps — plan for future prototyping efforts
Testing helped us get initial feedback from people learning about the death penalty, and collaborative brainstorming allowed us to generate even more concepts to guide users. Next, we plan to continue this momentum by diverging and creating concepts that address some of our lingering questions:
- What drives people to learn more?
- What topics about the death penalty are important at different stages of learning journeys?
- How can we measure if people become more knowledgeable or invested after using these concepts?
By continuing the cycle of testing and iterating, we hope to converge and land on a set of concepts in the next couple of weeks! With these, we aim to create a seamless journey that takes learners from hearing about the death penalty to learning more to reinvesting that knowledge and sharing it with others.
