GR3 - Paper Prototyping
Here are 2 iterations of our design. We choose to focus on our Dual-Window Design for user testing.
Prototype photos
Briefing
Here is the briefing we gave to users: Purpose of application: To explore the food options safely using our menu.
- You are a "chicken vegetarian", someone who is a vegetarian, except that you eat chicken.You are also allergic to peanuts
Scenario Tasks
Here are the tasks we gave to users, one after another.
1. Enter the dietary restrictions to the interface.
2. Browse the menu for an item that you can safely eat.
3. You realize today is a special day so you want to eat burgers.
Observations from Wednesday's Testing
Total number of users tested: 4
User testing descriptions
- Restrictions
- Unclear whether checking item 'includes' or 'excludes' it
- Item preference selection inconsistent between 'restrictions' menu
- Groups
- Not clear if checking 'vegetarian' is reversible
- Some users simply selected 'vegetarian' and did not attempt to 'de-select' chicken
- Item browsing
- Not clear at first that this is *not* an ordering system
- One user wanted to be able to 'dislike' food; not sure if that would cause even more confusion
- Use of 'neutral' face to indicate lack of restriction/preference is confusing; suggest happy face (and excited face for preference)
- Some users thought X/neutral face/happy face meant 'amount of ingredient in food'
Revisions
- Unify preference/restriction editing menu
- Instead of X/neutral face/happy face, use 'disgusted' face/happy face/excited face
- Use clearer categories than 'grains/fat/protein' (where are peanuts?)
- Clarify how to switch between menu and restrictions
- Big, eye-catching arrow
- 'Directional' for consistency; the menu is to the 'right' of the preference restrictions
- Remove ability to edit 'generic' preferences from menu viewing; only list selected items. Decrease UI clutter
- Using 'leading' phrases to indicate what to do: "what can't you eat?", etc.
- Add 'undo' button to indicate actions are reversible