Interview 1
11/17 via phone
emotional response: user found prototype cute and endearing
user valued: design and emotional aspect of prototype
user confused by: setup of the app
user pleasantly surprised by: ability to set emergency sessions
user wanted to ____ but couldn’t: see more app pages
user noted deficiencies: wanted to see more of prototype
other info: user was interested in the idea but wanted to see more
Interview 2
11/17 via phone
emotional response: user found prototype simple
user valued: user valued 1-1 aspect of the app
user confused by: what set the app apart from other services
user pleasantly surprised by: explanation of app’s unique aspects by me
user wanted to ____ but couldn’t: have a better visual of the app
user noted deficiencies: visual aspect and showing without telling
other info: user was interested but unsure if they would use the service
Interview 3
11/18 via phone
emotional response: user did not show an emotional response to app
user valued: price and cost of eventual services
user confused by: what the purpose of the app was for
user pleasantly surprised by: N/A
user wanted to ____ but couldn’t: again, get a better visual of the real layout
user noted deficiencies: in immediately grasping app’s purpose
other info: user seemed doubtful about the use of the service
Analysis: Although the three interviewees liked the look of the app, most could not grasp the concept with the incomplete visual provided. Most wanted to see more and grasp what made the app stand out from other existing competitors.
Reflection: I realized the first prototype did not resemble an app and what the service would actually provide and be structured as. I realized I needed a more complete presentation of the app, it’s services, and it’s look rather than the stylized prototype I showed them. I needed to do a lot more work to display more of a final product than a sample.