UX of the Present
Brief: Design an implement for modifying the present
Group: Diya, Priyanka, Sakshi, Shivangi, Sian
Research Methods: Data Physicalisation, Speed Dating
Week 1
From the outset, the group engaged in a lot of preliminary research, going over the suggested academic references as well as looking into additional secondary writing on the topic of time and the present. Although this allowed for us to discuss many topics related to time and the present, it broadened our range of possible directions to a point of debilitation. At this point I’ve had experience approaching user research both with a focused angle in mind, as well as an exploratory avenue which allows findings to inform our path moving forward.
The group looked into endless topics from the preliminary research and created an Affinity Diagramming to uncover clusters of topics of interest.
We decided that our Data Physicalisation should tackle the topic of altering the present. For Data Physicalisation, we must collect data and visibly display the information gathered. Collecting responses from 50 people, we asked them whether or not they wish to change their current reality. If they said no - we’d ask them what they wish to preserve, and if they said yes - we’d ask them what they would like to change.
However, when it came time to construct a physicalisation from the data collected, we found difficulty in presenting the qualitative data physically.
We reconducted our data collection, this time asking all participants to answer both questions - what would they keep and what would they change about our current reality. We noticed a pattern where people usually choose to preserve micro-level interests such as friends, family, and more money, but change macro-level issues, such as social injustices.
↑ Our first attempt at data collection for physicalization. Having separated the data collection from the physicalization meant we had to come up with a different way to visually display our insights.
↑ Our second attempt at data collection. In an attempt to gather data again we still haven’t conceptualised how we’d like to display the information afterwards.
We were still discussing how best we should physicalise the data we gathered when conversing with our tutors. They advised us to first set a specific direction for the project and move forward with the design process, pointing out the wide range of ideas the group grappled with as a possible obstacle.
Deliberating on several of the shortlisted topics, we ended up choosing alternative realities as our main area of focus. We then constructed a Data Physicalisation where participants had to connect yarn down a flow chart full of decision-making points, ultimately leading them to a resolution. They could visually see “the road not taken”. Often, they peeked to see which outcome they could have had. Despite this Data Physicalisation exercise being more 2D than we’d have liked, we decided to take the gathered insights and move forward with them.
Curious with the realisation that people are captivated by glimpsing into another life, we wanted to explore the idea of “what could’ve been” as our design goal.
↑ Data Physicalisation end result. One path was more popular than the others, as visible by the amount of strings tied to this path.
↑ Each decision led them towards one of the four possible outcomes. After making all the decision, their outcome is revealed.
↑ Using a piece of yarn, participants revealed one card at a time. Making a decision advanced them down a certain path.
Week 2
One interesting insight gathered from the Data Physicalisation is the desire to peek into other outcomes. Unsurprisingly to us, it appears to be quite a ubiquitous reaction to the chance of seeing other outcomes. The group was also enthralled with exploring this idea further. One participant, after checking all possible outcomes, voiced her newfound gratitude to the one she received after having learnt of worse options. This sense of gratitude interested me quite a bit, as it was a way to modify the present - developing a new sense of satisfaction with your life as it is.
The group decided to brainstorm ideas individually, and present them later to decide a path forward. Based on the previously mentioned insight, I thought of a device that showcases its holder a possible worse reality, thus urging them to consider how lucky they are in their current state.
We noticed repeated elements across all our ideas, so we mixed elements from all ideas together and ended up with 3 options to test in Speed Dating. In this research method, we present our ideas to participants who have to quickly choose one they liked most. Through this we found that most participants, though would love to experience a change to their lives, would much rather it to be temporary, with the option to “try on” different realities but then come back to their current state.
↑ Group brainstorming session where we presented our individual ideas based on our findings thus far.
↑ Based on common threads from our ideas, we developed 6 ideas with mixed elements, choosing 3 to present to users for the Speed Dating.
↑ Five participants were presented with our ideas. There was a consensus around the preference to completely control every element of the new reality out of fear of disliking it otherwise. They also all preferred a short, temporary change with the option to transport back.
Based on the Speed Dating results, the device was constructed after a Rubik’s Cube. With a finite but large amount of combinations to choose from, one can shape their desired reality to a certain extent, but leave room for unforeseen consequences.
As it wasn’t physically possible to transport participants into another dimension, we opted for a performative and speculative experience showcasing how such a device would operate had it been real.
The result encourages gratitude, highlighting the phrase “be careful what you wish for”.
↑ Priyanka suggested we use a device inspired by a Rubik’s Cube. Each square can move and while it allows for a certain degree of calibration with a large number of possible combinations, it’s still finite.
↑ The device we wanted to create was a large cylinder that is configured on the outside and transports the user into a dimension where the chosen elements have been changed.
↑ The qualitative insights from our initial data collection informed the elements that can be configured on the panes of the machine.
↑ In our story, a person who wishes they were a famous singer attempts to construct this reality using the machine. However, they soon realise being very famous has its downsides.
↑ To showcase the events unfolding in the new reality we created a film to show in class while the participant is in the machine.
Final outcome:
↑ An aspiring musician wishes to be in a reality plenty of fame and ambition.
↑ She configures this into the machine and walks in.
* This clip contains audio
↑ However, this is what she experiences in the alternative reality.
↑ She leaves the machine, happy with her life as it is.
Feedback:
The fidelity of the device we constructed in class could have been better. Its level of presentation took away from the overall experience and the ability to suspend disbelief, a necessary element of speculative design that wishes to be taken seriously.
Reflection:
Looking back, it feels like we spent a disproportionate amount of time debating and ideating instead of testing and refining our ideas in practice. Had we reached consensus more quickly within the group, we might have been able to dedicate more time to the physical device we created in class, potentially leading to a stronger end product. The effort to achieve unanimity within the group often slowed us down, as we attempted to accommodate everyone's perspective. These moments of misalignment sometimes hindered our ability to push the project to its full potential.