The direct observation was performed in a controlled environment on a person well accustomed to the usage of smartphones. During the evaluation, every action was spoken aloud, as they should be.
The evaluation began with me asking the person to explore the application freely. Given only these instructions the person signed in by simply tapping the login-button, no questions asked. I conclude that this particular screen is very intuitive.
Having the home-screen at display, the person commented on the information present. The comments were mostly about the statistics, saying that the histogram needed numbers to convey the information more clearly and that the green bar needed something along the same lines in order to serve its purpose. In regards to the ”Autogiro” headline, the person thought it would be better to rename it and use the name ”To Pay”. All of this information implies that this screen must be redesigned.
Next, the person, by accident, opened the statistics-screen, being surprised when doing so. Clearly, we have to make it visibly known that the stats presented on the home-screen are clickable. The person thought that this screen was pretty understandable though, only leaving comments on the maximum/minimum cost headlines. ”Does ”Maximum cost” mean that I only can be charged, at the most, 100 kr a day?”
The person found the last two screens to be intuitive.
Following the evaluation, I conducted a one-question-interview, asking about the overall impression of our application. In short, the answer was that the application seemed a bit messy, it was including a lot, maybe a little too much.
I agree. Our application include more than is necessary. If a feature isn’t crucial, it should be discarded. Simple and clean is the way to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment