In-Car Rear Seat Infotainment System 🚗

Data Analysis 

The data was analysed to form findings and draw conclusions from. The process involved the development of an empathy map, the utilisation of the user requirement shell to prioritise requirements, the implementation of the CoUA (context of user analysis) and MoSCoW technique to streamline and comprehend the interview data, and the subsequent integration of this information into the product design planning and execution. 

The data analysis revealed the following information:

• There are two different categories of primary users who will be using the product, and their main tasks and objectives will be to access the entertainment system, weather information, driver/vehicle/driver information, call for help in an emergency, and assistive technologies like voice assistance, colour blindness, language, etc

• The users are adept at technology and have experience with related systems

• Users have concerns about data leaks and privacy violations

• The technology may be disruptive to the driver and other passengers in a shared cab

Consolidated Findings
The initial stage of the design was initiated by grouping together recurring themes found in the examined data from the study

• Individualisation is essential for users with regards to the software they employ, their preferred language, and any accessibility concerns they may have, such as colour blindness or impaired vision

• Users worry about sharing private information like email address, phone number, etc., when accessing a service

• Some parents of young children worry about the content their kids may be exposed to.

• Most users do not like using public networks for formal business or checking personal email

• Real-time access to the most recent ride details

• Users hope the technology will allow them to operate the car's temperature settings without diverting attention from the driver

• Helpline information to contact during any unprecedented emergency for the safety concern

• Some users who travel to different countries, prefers that the system can provide some basic information on nearby attractions, such as restaurants and parks

• Users want wireless connectivity so that they can sync with the smartphone to access tailored applications and then disconnect when they get out of the taxi.
  

After the research phase was complete, the design process began by settling on a name for the product (‘Ride’) and developing a proposition statement that articulated the product's primary purpose.

Version 2

In this version, the team realised the importance enhancing the situation awareness of users by conveying information about their current ride, providing alternate ways to authenticate their ride other than verbal communication with driver and their smartphone, giving access to media control before starting the journey.

Version 3

In this version, the team decided to incorporate the above two versions and put in the best elements to start with the prototype.

EVALUATION

User-Based Testing

University students were recruited to participate from various courses to test the interface. The participants were familiar with interactive products but had no prior hands-on experience of the testing equipment or anything similar, particularly regarding the tasks.

Participants were encouraged to "think aloud" about their thought processes. The moderator contextualised and explained the tasks, and the users were observed completing them. Time taken to complete each scenario was measured, along the number of errors made and clicks. Comments from the participants were noted. Upon completion of the tasks, the participants were asked to complete a questionnaire that focused on prototypes usability.

Each user had one minute to become acquainted with and understand the prototype before the trial began. An observer timed users on each activity's completion (efficiency) and how successfully it was completed (effectiveness) throughout the trial. The moderator took note of the feedback provided by users as they interact with the prototype to assess user satisfaction.

To capture how the user's hands interacted with the physical interface of the prototype or product, two strategically placed cameras recorded the user performing the tasks. Users' camera and screen recording, which enabled audio and video recording of tasks and the visuals of displays accessed by them, was used to assist all experiment monitoring and recording.  

System Usability Scale (SUS)

SUS was used in the experiment to assess the prototype's usability. Due to its simplicity and dependability, even with tiny samples, this is a widely used instrument to quickly evaluate the usability of products or systems, as experienced by users Ten statements—five positive and five negatives—about the usability of the system or product make up the SUS questionnaire. On a 5-point Likert scale, users rate their level of agreement with the assertions. The score from the application of SUS surveys can be anywhere between 0 and 100. The system's usability is considered adequate if the SUS score is higher than 70 and unacceptable usability if lower than 50.

The tasks were selected on the frequency and must have features in the taxi as they were selected to be most important. They were as follows:

1.  Change of destination: Usability measure when users may have to change the ride.

2. Safety feature: Usability measure in situations where users feel they are not safe and will need help.

3. Child mode: Usability measure in situations users what their content to be filtered.

The users were assessed on the following basis:

1. Time taken to complete the task

2. Number of clicks

3. Number of errors
   

Findings and Recommendations

From the sample of six participants, the prototype achieved an SUS rating of 86.4 which is considered 'Good'.

Considering the goals of the system, scope, constraints, priority of must-have features, and discussion with team members, users the recommendations for further development for prototypes are:

1. Usability: Users found the layout is intuitive but with navigation, they had issues with Kids mode/Parental Lock so instead of using terms that could confuse the user, Locking or Safe Search toggle button would help in such situations.

2. Functionality: In terms of features, the menu options could be displayed with a name below for each icon so it's easier for users. A confirmation pop up post resetting the end location is also something that users thought were essential.

3. Design: Users liked its visual appeal, the use of colours and fonts, also overall aesthetic but the buttons with main function should be available most of the time and easy to locate.

4. User experience: Users they felt it was easy to use in most cases but overload of information at once confuses to decided and locate the necessary buttons.

The prototype could be improved by having a demo video before they use the system. It is essential to gather further feedback from a diverse group to ensure that the input represents the target user group and to consider these suggestions carefully during the design process.