“What a Small World!” --- NaviChat

1. “What a Small World!” ---NaviChat Team 4: Andrew Puchle Arthur Liu Yi-Jen Lai

2. Problem Space Context: • The pervasive SNS websites show how much people are willing to share true identities and build true relationships. • People become addicted to “networks” • A common interest or experience promotes relationship, esp. during first meetings.

3. Problem Space Purpose: • This product helps people to find friends within a physical distance according to certain criterion pre-defined by the user, such as hobbies, common friends, experience, etc. • The user becomes a “walking network”. Potential audience • People who are interested in finding friends with common interests or experience.

4. Problem Space Competitiveness Analysis • “real” or bridging the virtual and reality • Personalization: Keywords, Profile editing. • Matching rate: take advantage of as many means of connection as possible.

5. Problem Space Use: • Public places - Find people who share your experience • First meeting - Avoid awkwardness Assumptions: • Public context provides indication of people’s preference, background and so on. • People are connectable - “Small world!” • People can be generalized and matched by several key words • People have different self-built “identities”, they only show one facet of themselves(or one identity) in one particular environment.

6. Problem Space • Goals Usability: Effectiveness: High matching rate Efficiency: Real-time interaction Learnability: Personalization Safety: Credential Authentication

7. Problem Space • Goals Experience: Physio-pleasure: Easy to hold and operate Socio-pleasure: Excitement of building relationship Psycho-pleasure: Effective and efficient to connect with people Ideo-pleasure: Personalization to reflect personal tastes and experience.

8. Requirement Gathering Questionnaire: • Demographic: Age, gender occupation • SNS experience: Facebook, MySpace • Opinions toward publicizing personal information to strangers • Interests on knowing new friends who matches

9. Questionnaire: • Age:  18-20  21-23  24-26  27-30  30-40  41+ • Sex:  Male  Female • Occupation:  Full-time  Part-time  Student  Other: ___________ • Personality:  Extrovert  Introvert • Do you have a chance to make new friend in your daily life: •  Yes  No • Experience of using community website:  Yes  No • If your answer is Yes, proceed to question 7. If your answer is No, proceed to question 10. • What community website have you experience using: • Facebook Twitter  My Space  Other: ___________ • How many friend do you have in that community website: •  1-50  51-100  101-200  201-300  301-500  501+ • What proportion of friends in the community website you really know who they are in reality: •  100%  99%-75%  74%-50%  49%-25%  24%-0% • Do you like the concept of community website:  Yes  No • How do you think If there will be a new mobile device which has similar function as community website’s: •  Interested  Accepted  No comment  Other: ___________ • Are you willing to let other people access to your personal profile? • Is there any type of information that you would like to see available through the device (mobile community center)? • Do you think this device can work or not? (helping people make new friend)

10. Requirement Gathering Preliminary Conclusion: • All have SNS experiences with most of their friends are “unknown”. • Most of them are willing to have new friends. • Most of them are willing to reveal their name, age, occupation, interests and so on and are interested to see others’.

11. Conceptual Model (social computing model) In a concerted effort to design a best-fit application, one that compliments the needs of both the users and the system, the team needs to focus deeply on the key computer mediated components (CMC) required for ultimate acceptance and accomplishment.

12. Conceptual Model Continued Key CMC Elements • The Device will be mobile rather than web-based so as to not compete with established web applications with similar functionality • Both asynchronous and synchronous communication will be supported. • Users will be able to talk synchronously via Instant Messaging, or text messaging via the typing interface. • Users will conversely be able to communicate asynchronously posting messages while the other users are not currently present.

13. Conceptual Model Continued Requirements: Conceptual Requirements: • This device will be designed as an application for portable devices such as smart phones, rather than a web based application. • Connections between people will be based on interest basis rather than a demographic one. • Users will be able to access other users who match them on ideas such as music, hobbies, sports, and other cultural pastimes. System Requirements: • Mobile device with touch-based or PDA type hardware (iPhone, Blackberry) to facilitate the use of a web-like mobile application.

14. Conceptual Model Continued User requirements: • ability to read and select choices from a menu • comfortable using a computer and accessing the internet • comfortable with the idea of a support group • ability to follow/comprehend a written conversation (chat) • ability to understand written instructions for use

15. Low-fidelity Prototype http://www.apuchle.com/I541/FINAL/LoFi.html

16. High-fidelity Prototype • http://www.apuchle.com/I541/FINAL/indexOLD.html

17. Product Evaluation • Four external evaluators • Age : 20 to 32 • Three evaluators have IT background The data we gained from: • Task Errors • Post-Task Questionnaire • Interview

18. Assessment of Findings(External evaluation) • Per four tasks - 2.5 errors (those errors were mainly happened in performing the task that require participants to set up their interests) • Overall score for post-task questionnaire which focused on the usability of NaviCHAT is 3.86/5 • Most participants thought NaviCHAT is useful and easy to use, however, it is also difficult for new users to grab its usage in the beginning

19. Assessment of Findings (External evaluation) • Advanced Information is better to have standard form • The instruction could be more detailed • Location Profile’s status is better to be shown on main screen • Time-based search could be added in • Privacy issue is be concerned

20. Assessment of Findings (Internal Walkthrough) • Should let users update their status such as online, away, busy, etc. • Friends statuses should be visible • Should let users know the locations where the other users are • Should add page label on every screen • Button label should be more clear

21. Suggested Changes • Enable importing the data from other social network websites like Facebook, MySpace • Provide a virtual map for users to locate other users’ location • Connection’s references could be more diversified

22. An improved version • http://www.apuchle.com/I541/FINAL/index.html

23. Thank you!