Levelist

Description

About

Objectives & Goal of the App:

To develop a user-centric task management app tailored to university students that streamlines personal and academic organization through intuitive design and engaging gamification features, ultimately promoting consistent task completion and productivity.

Mainly focus on these areas: 1.Enhance Productivity: Help users manage academic and personal tasks more efficiently by providing a centralized and flexible planning tool. 2.Boost Engagement: Incorporate gamification elements such as streaks, rewards, and progress tracking to motivate consistent use and increase task completion rates. 3.Improve User Experience: Offer a simple, clutter-free interface that supports quick task entry, prioritization, and review from any device, at any time. 4.Gather Behavioral Insights: Collect usage data and feedback to continually refine features based on real user needs and behaviors. 5.Support Academic Success: Align features with student workflows (e.g., deadlines, study sessions, group work) to help manage coursework and reduce procrastination. 6.Ensure Accessibility: Provide a seamless experience across devices, ensuring students can manage tasks wherever they are.

Similar App

1.Habitica

Description: Habitica is a productivity app that turns your daily tasks and to-dos into a role-playing game (RPG). Users create avatars and earn rewards for completing real-life tasks like homework, studying, or exercising. You lose health for missing tasks and gain experience points and gold for staying productive. The app includes features like streaks, party quests, and in-game rewards to encourage consistency and accountability.

Key Features: • Gamified task and habit tracking • Customizable avatars • In-app rewards and penalties • Group challenges and social features

Relevance: Habitica blends gamification with task management, making it a good benchmark for your app’s engagement and motivational goals.

1.Todoist

Description: Todoist is a widely used task management app that offers powerful tools for organizing personal and professional tasks. While it doesn’t rely heavily on gamification, it provides a clean interface, task prioritization, recurring reminders, and productivity visualizations such as a “karma” system that rewards consistent use and completion of tasks.

Key Features: • Task organization with projects, labels, and priorities • Recurring tasks and due dates • Productivity tracking with “Karma” points • Cross-platform syncing

Relevance: Todoist is a leader in usability and productivity tracking, offering a minimal design while still encouraging consistent use through its Karma system—an example of subtle gamification.

3. Duolingo

Description: Duolingo is a language learning app that uses gamification to make education fun, addictive, and consistent. Users learn through short, interactive lessons while earning points (XP), maintaining streaks, leveling up, and unlocking rewards. The app’s design focuses heavily on habit formation and motivation through visual progress indicators, leaderboards, and in-app currencies.

Key Features: • Gamified learning: XP, streaks, levels, and achievements • Daily goals and reminders • Progress tracking with skills trees • Leaderboards and friend challenges • In-app currency (Lingots/Gems) to unlock perks • Friendly, colorful design to reduce learning anxiety

Relevance : Duolingo is a strong model for: • Daily streaks to promote habit consistency • Reward systems to keep users motivated • Progress bars and levels to provide a sense of achievement • Push notifications and goal setting to maintain engagement

Contextual Inquiry

Main Objectives

To investigate how university students manage their academic and personal tasks, and assess the potential effectiveness of gamification elements like streaks, levels, and rewards in enhancing motivation and task completion. The ultimate goal is to use this insight to inform the feature design and user experience of the Levelist app.

Method:

This contextual inquiry was conducted remotely using a structured online survey designed in Google Forms. The survey aimed to replicate the reflective depth of in-person inquiry by prompting university students to think critically about their task management behaviors, motivations, and preferences. The questionnaire consisted of 20 items, divided into four sections: general task management habits, motivation and engagement, gamification preferences, and desired app features. It incorporated a mix of multiple-choice, Likert scale, and open-ended questions to gather both quantitative data and qualitative insights. Students were asked about their current task tools, prioritization strategies, satisfaction with task completion, and exposure to gamified apps like Duolingo or Habitica. They also reflected on how features such as streaks, progress bars, and digital rewards might affect their engagement. The survey was distributed online via class groups, social platforms, and university mailing lists to ensure broad, convenient access, and was designed to be completed in approximately 10 minutes.

Participant's:

The participants for this study were university students aged between 18 and 30, representing a range of academic disciplines and study years. The recruitment targeted individuals currently engaged in academic or personal task planning, regardless of their preferred tools or level of organization. Participants were invited to complete the online survey through convenient channels such as class WhatsApp groups, university mailing lists, and social media platforms. The study aimed for a minimum of 15 participants to collect initial insights, with a focus on quality of responses rather than statistical generalizability. All participants voluntarily participated in the survey and were informed about the estimated time commitment of 10 minutes. The chosen demographic reflects the app’s core user base, making the insights particularly relevant for shaping features that align with the needs and behaviors of students managing daily responsibilities.

Limitations:

While the online survey method provided convenient access to participants and enabled efficient data collection, it also introduced several limitations. As the data was entirely self-reported, there is a possibility of bias—participants may have overestimated their productivity or responded in ways they believed were expected. The lack of real-time observation meant that actual task management behaviors could not be directly verified, which limits the depth of behavioral insights compared to traditional contextual inquiry methods. The relatively small sample size, targeted only at university students, restricts the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. Additionally, because the survey was conducted remotely and asynchronously, the researchers could not probe deeper into responses or clarify ambiguous answers, reducing the richness and context of qualitative feedback. Despite these constraints, the study still offers valuable directional insights to guide the design of the Levelist app.

Analysis of a specific query

1. Use of basic productivity tools:

• Digital tools predominate: Phone notes and calendar apps are popular. • Certain task managers (e.g. Todoist, Notion) are used occasionally. • Paper diaries are rarely used, often marked as “never.”

Detailed Analysis:

• Technology Choice: Today’s cultural shift towards digital devices is most affecting the younger generation, who are definitely connected to mobility and smartphone integration. • Todoist and Notion Pitfalls: While task managers like Todoist and Notion are powerful, they can present a steeper learning curve or be overwhelming to casual users, all of which limits their adoption. • Decline in Analog Design: The decline and near-absence of paper diaries reflects changing habits and a possible lack of interest in tactile, slower-paced planning methods. The response to emerging technologies: • Neutral-informative, with a slightly observational tone. Presents findings without judgment, but points to hidden behavioral changes.

2. Strategies used for task grading

Summary of content:

• Basic grading is the most common. • Strategic methods are used by fewer people. • A large percentage of them rely on spontaneous or indefinite planning (“it depends”).

Detailed analysis:

• Lack of structure: Many participants may rely on intuition or urgency rather than frameworks (such as the Eisenhower matrix), leading to inconsistency and lack of priorities. • Non-standard approach: It is understood that the phrase “no suitable schedule” indicates reactive planning, which can potentially harm long-term goal alignment. • Part of different user types: In these user types, there is a visible contrast between casual users and disciplined planners, who probably represent a minority. In summary, the following can be seen: • Mildly critical but constructive — identifies gaps and hints at solutions without directly blaming users.

3. Obstacles or challenges to task completion

Description of task completion:

• The most common obstacles are: laziness, procrastination, lack of motivation, boredom. • Many respondents gave vague or no answers. According to the detailed description of the interviewers: • Internal challenges prevail: These are not external/systemic obstacles, but personal psychological barriers, such as lack of commitment, low interest or problems related to habits. • Inaction and disinterest are a factor in the following: Mentioning that tasks are “uninteresting” is a major factor in inconsistency with personal goals or intrinsic motivation. • Low self-esteem is defined by responses such as: “Don’t know” responses suggest avoidance or lack of emotional insight, common in chronic procrastinators.

Summary of this part of the analysis:

• Empathy and psychological behaviors — this section frames resistance to the task not as failure, but as an emotional and cognitive challenge.

4. Level of motivation or mindset

• Motivation is primarily moderate; highly motivated people are fewer but more organized. • Low motivation is characterized by poor planning and lack of commitment. Motivation description: • Moderate motivation is defined by default: This group may depend on external factors (deadlines, accountability) rather than internal drive. • High motivation has effective execution: This motivation has a clear relationship between motivation and the effectiveness of productivity tools, suggesting that mindset precedes method. • Regarding low motivation - it is confusing in planning: These people probably need behavioral support, not just recommendations for tools.

To summarize this point:

• Analytical method and diagnostic - identifies motivation as a key behavioral factor in productivity.

Summary of the models:

1. Implementation and performance are defined: Ownership does not equal use; technology alone is not enough. 2. Motivation and methods are: The best indicator of success is the user’s mindset. 3. Reactive planning dominates: Proactive routines are lacking. 4. Intention-performance gap: People know what they need to do, but fail to execute.

Summary:

• There is a mismatch between intention, knowledge, and behavior. • The study paints a picture of users who are overwhelmed, unstructured, and emotionally upset by productivity

Recommendations

• Teach simple prioritization frameworks. • Encourage consistent use of fewer tools. • Address emotional barriers with motivational strategies. • Encourage reflective practices to increase self-awareness. Rating: • Pragmatic and actionable: These recommendations are based on behavioral science. • Address both the instrumental and human elements: Recognize the psychological as well as the technical. • Focus on habit building: Rather than recommending new tools, the focus is on consistency and self-reflection, which is more sustainable.

Conclusion

The document is well organized, moving from tools to behavior, analysis, and advice. It is aimed at academic research and a specific academic group: students. The analysis of the survey conducted examined the interests, attitudes, thinking, and behavior of students in using app planners, and their opinions on the use of these technologies