Results of the prototype testing and interview on the types of media and adding content (question 1 and 2)

In order to answer question 1 about the best combination of media types, the HiFi-prototype contained three screens showing three different combinations of media: photos with a voice recording, a video and a photo with a song.

During the prototype testing, one of the tasks was to go through the content of the life storybook. In order to make a statement on which of the screens seems to be most stimulating, the participant’s first reaction after opening the screen and the time they spent on this screen was noted. In the interview it was easier to get to such a statement since the participants could be asked directly which combination of media would trigger the most response. An overview over all data, consisting of the reactions and times of the prototype testing and the answers from the interview, collected regarding question 1 can be seen in figure 35.

Positive exclamations of the participants while looking through the screen are colored in orange and whenever they did not show any reaction or do any action, the corresponding part is colored in grey. This shows that there was more positive response to the photos with voice recording and the video than to the photo with song. A similar interpretation can be obtained from the time values indicating that with 5 seconds on average, the participants spent the least time on the screen including a photo and a song. Therefore, they might be least delighted by this combination. According to the times, the photo and voice seems most interesting with 24 seconds spent on this screen.

Opposed to that, with the answers from the interview, it becomes clear that the voice recording was perceived with scepsis by the participants. Two of them emphasized that it is important that the voice is familiar and one added that the voice has no effect if it unfamiliar. Regarding the other options, the video and the photo with song, all of the participants were convinced that they could trigger memories.

These results reveal a discrepancy between the participants’ actions and reactions during the testing and their answers in the interview. A possible explanation could be the order of combinations in which they were presented to the participants: they are naturally more fascinated by something they encountered for the first time than by something they have already seen before. In addition to that, time spent on the first screen was also used to understand how everything works. This was the case for the second participant who was first busy thinking about what the play and pause button mean. Therefore, more time spent on a screen cannot only be interpreted as more interest, but can also be cause by other factors.

The conclusion is that the video was assessed positively in both cases, the testing and the interview, while for the photo and voice it was emphasized in the interview that the voice should be familiar. Photo and song were evaluated as stimulating in the interview, however, the

reactions in the prototype testing did not reflect that which might be due to the fact that this combination was shown last.

Next to that, the goal was to find out how well the HiFi-prototype works or more specifically, how well the participants perform in adding new content, as specified in question 2. To be able to answer this questions, in the prototype testing the participants were asked to do add a photo to the life storybook and give it a caption.

The table in figure 36 lists all actions of each participant throughout fulfilling this task. Whenever they did something wrong or showed a reaction signifying that something was wrong, the corresponding part in the table is marked in red. Furthermore, if the participant needed a hint to be able to continue with the task, it is highlighted in yellow. The steps each participant went through are similar, with the difference that the second one immediately started with the correct action and therefore has one wrong action and one hint less. The same participant also did not show a negative reaction after clicking the ‘add’-button. The other two struggled at two moments, first in the very beginning, they chose the wrong button, and then after clicking ‘add’, the second button, they were confused that they had to choose ‘gallery’ again. All participants needed a hint before they swiped to see the added photo.

These struggles were also expressed in the answers the participants gave to the question if something was missing, confusing, unexpected or not working. One stated that the procedure of adding a picture in general is not working. To another participant it was confusing

which of the two buttons ‘select’ and ‘add’ to click first. The last one pointed out that it does not make sense that ‘gallery’ has to be chosen again after clicking ‘add’.

Besides that, two participants also added suggestions to their complaints: the idea was mentioned to make it visually logical which button has to be clicked first and more concretely, the buttons could appear in the order they have to be clicked, so that first only the ‘select’-button is shown and then only the ‘add’-button. With regards to adding a caption, no issues have been observed and the participants stated, that entering a caption is easy and logical.

In conclusion, three struggles occurred: the order in which the ‘select’- and ‘add’-buttons have to be clicked was not clear, the fact that ‘gallery’ has to be chosen twice was not perceived as logical and an indicator is missing that tells the user to swipe after adding a photo.