Locate

A mobile application to help those with walking disabilities travel easier.

(Click on the image to view our presentation)

This project was done as a part of Design at UCI's Project Teams program. It was my first UI/UX experience and gave me great initial exposure to the field.

Team Members: Amy Pham, Jay Sotelo, Jessie Lam, Nicole Iftekhar, & Renee Uchida

Duration: 7 weeks

Role: UI/UX Designer

Tools: Figma, Google Docs, Google Slides, Zoom, Maze

Prototype: Click here to view the mobile prototype

The Problem

The theme for the program this year was "travel." Given the growing awareness around accessibility in design as well as the advancement of technology for those with disabilities, we wanted to focus on an application that would assist those with disabilities while traveling. Moreover, 25.5 million Americans age 5 and older have self-reported travel-limiting disabilities, so we were inspired to create a product that could help some of them.

Ultimately, we explored the question of how can we ease the burden of travel for those with walking disabilities?

User Research

We started with a Google survey to better understand the travel experience for those with walking disabilities and how we can improve that experience. We received 14 responses from respondents' aged 18-25 years old, often from those who were close to someone with a disability.

Key findings:

Accessibility features during travel that were important to users included elevators, ramps, accessible bathrooms, and accessible transportation, especially elevators and ramps.
Respondents often cited that it took them longer to get to places.
Hills, inclines, uneven ground, and stairs were common obstacles.
Respondents desired to know the locations of ramps, elevators, escalators, benches, foot rests, accessible/spacious seating, accessible bathrooms, and places to rest.

Wireframes

1. Sketches

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 1.04.13 PM.png

2. Mid-fi wireframes

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 12.30.30 PM.png

3. High-fi wireframes

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 12.41.20 PM.png

Log-in process

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 12.46.01 PM.png

Reporting hazards

Key Features of Locate

There were 2 main features we wanted to implement with the application:

1. An interactive map - Shown as the main page, it would allow users to view markers showing potential hazards and locations of accessible infrastructure such as accessible bathrooms. They would then prepare routes based on these markers.

2. Reporting and review capability - Users would be able to report potential hazards and accessible infrastructure themselves in order to update the map for all users. Users would also be able to give reviews about certain markers and share comments.

Usability Testing

My other team members conducted two usability interviews over Zoom and three users tested remotely over Maze. We utilized this script.

Key findings:

60% of interviewees found marker icons confusing.

Change:

2. 80% valued location details over area description.

Change:

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 2.10.29 PM.png

Screen Shot 2023-08-19 at 2.10.32 PM.png

What Would I Do Differently?

Most

important!

I was really proud of our team for our final product. However, since the team faced organization, communication, and scheduling challenges due to the time constraint of the project, there is still much room to grow and improve the application.

1. More Comprehensive User Research

Not only would I have conducted more research, but I would have also ensured a more representative sample for the research that we did conduct.

Firstly, for the Google survey that we conducted, I would have wanted to collect a higher number of responses. Moreover, many of the respondents were close to someone with a disability rather than directly reaching those with disabilities. In the future, I would have made a greater effort to hear first-hand from those with disabilities and reached out to my school's disability center to see if they could help with that.

Next, I would have established a more formal research plan with specific objectives and participant criteria. I would have also considered creating a clearer vision of our user through user personas and journey mapping as well as utilized other forms of testing such as A/B testing.

2. Establishing Branding Guidelines

Although we took care to pay attention to our color palette, we did not establish formal branding guidelines. Additionally, we did not do much research as to which colors might be the best for a travel app.

With more time, I would have outlined hex codes for app pages, icons, and the text. I would have also documented the typography of the app such as fonts and font sizes for headings and body text.

The app could have also benefited from a stronger logo and application name. These aspects were worked on less due to the time constraint. In the future, I would have designed several versions of what the application logo could be and brainstormed more names that would relate to accessibility more.

3. Conducting a Second Round of Iteration

I would have also liked to hold a second round of usability testing after other improvements and enhancements were made. There are also some key aspects of our features that I would have liked to develop more such as:

How can we combat outdated information on the app?
Could the app automate routes for users?
How can we incorporate topography data to pre-populate hazards in the app?
How can we strengthen the community aspect of the app?

4. Improved Documentation

Finally, I wish we documented our process better when it came to the evolution of our sketches and wireframes. When we were reflecting on the project later, it was harder to demonstrate how our wireframes changed since we did not document our different stages.