2.744
Human-use Analysis Reviews
Home > Assignments > Human-use analysis results > Reviews for Florence Yip

Florence Yip
team puzzled
[review]

 Analysis RatingsPresentation Ratings
Average Rating
 
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
1-marginal     2-ok    3-good     4-very good    5-outstanding

Quality and thoroughness of human-use analysis and improvement suggestions

Reviewer 1:

Analysis was very well thought through. I liked that you categorized the good and bad in the overall experience section and took your time explaining each individually. I also appreciated the accompanying drawings in the solutions section.

One thing that you mentioned but didn't analyze was the user interface to pay and then to pick the functions. I think an analysis of that (how easy to understand the options are, would there be a way to simplify the options so users aren't confused with having too many choices, are there choices you think are missing) would allow for a more complete picture of the overall experience.

Another suggestion is to interview other users about their experience. Overall, though, this was a very thoughtful analysis. Good job!

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

This was a very thorough and thoughtful analysis of the self service car wash experience. It was well structured to walk the reader through an introduction into car washes and their typical users, followed by a good depiction of a typical car washing experience. The experience summary and subsequent improvement suggestions were very well laid out. In terms of improvements, it would have been nice to include a 'big picture' description and photo of the facility to give the reader a better sense of the experience. Also, there are multiple instances of incorrect grammar throughout the writing, i.e. "but there has not been much changes..." This is a bit distracting to the reader and takes away from the message.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

There was a thorough analysis of the procedure that goes into washing the car, however, it does not show the extent of the other resources that are available in the facility. Additionally, since this is a 24/7 location, would the conditions and user interaction is the same during the day compared to the day. There was also an instruction set next to the selection board that could've been interesting to analyze specifically how the information was presented. How was the notification system for the time that was remaining? Analyzing the user interaction with the machine after the time was reserved could be a good talking point along with any complications that arose.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Interesting experience choice - I've never used one of these! I like that you considered a wide variety of UX aspects for the car wash. However, I would have liked to see a bit more detail on the payment and service selection process, as this seems confusing to me (as someone who has never used it). Your suggestions for improvement also make a lot of sense, but don't seem to address some of the problems you mentioned, like getting wet or not having staff.

return to top of page



Clarity and presentation of human-use experience analysis

Reviewer 1:

The website was easy to navigate. There were a couple of times in which symbols didn't show up correctly (usually apostrophes or quotations), which is probably due to copying and pasting in html. Once or twice would have been okay to ignore, but these did occur often enough that they would disrupt the reading. I would have preferred if there was spacing between the text and the photos in the procedure so the text didn't run into the photos.

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

Overall, the website was clean, simple, and aesthetically pleasing. It did a good job of conveying the required messages, with no added distractions. The clarity could be improved a bit in the procedure section by changing the format of the steps or by adding a clearer mark to delineate the different steps. I got mixed up a few times where I wasn't sure if the caption was for the photo above or below because the layout only had one line break between each section.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

The images that were used were clear in describing the issues that arose with using the car wash, however, there were some that could've have been closer to put the task in a larger frame. The thought process and analysis was well divided with headings in larger font and different color to grab attention to the point of the section. The pages were divided well, giving a different page for a larger topic.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

The presentation is very clear, and your sketches are great!

return to top of page