Difference between revisions of "MAJA Travel App"

From
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Presentation Link)
 
(34 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[[File:maja2.png|300px|center]]
 
−
 
 
=Description=
 
=Description=
 +
[[File:maja2.png|300px|right|]]
 
====About====
 
====About====
 
'''Goal of the App:'''  
 
'''Goal of the App:'''  
−
To help travellers effortlessly document and share their journeys by integrating visual storytelling (photos), private reflections (notes), travel planning (itineraries), and public recommendations, all linked to an interactive map. As well as planning future trips.
+
To help travellers effortlessly document and share their journeys by integrating visual storytelling (photos), private reflections (notes), travel planning (itineraries), and public recommendations, all linked to an interactive map. Users can review and share the highlights of their trip using a comprehensive review utility.
  
 
=Similar Apps=
 
=Similar Apps=
Line 64: Line 63:
 
====Method====
 
====Method====
  
−
To explore how users currently document and share their travel experiences, we conducted a Contextual Inquiry using semi-structured interviews as the primary method. This approach allowed us to gain in-depth insights into real user behaviours, motivations, and pain points in their natural context.
+
To explore how users currently document and share their travel experiences, we conducted a Contextual Inquiry using semi-structured interviews as the primary method. This approach enabled us to gain in-depth insights into real user behaviours, motivations, and pain points within their natural or simulated travel contexts.
  
−
We selected 11 participants who had recently completed a trip or were active travellers. Participants were chosen to represent a diverse range of travel styles, including solo travellers, frequent business travellers, and people travelling with friends/partners.
+
We recruited 11 participants using an opportunistic sampling method, focusing on individuals who had either recently completed a trip or were actively engaged in travel. The sample included a diverse mix of travel styles, such as solo travellers, frequent business travellers, and those travelling with friends or partners.
  
−
Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and was conducted either in person or via video call, depending on participant availability. The interviews followed a semi-structured format, allowing for open-ended responses while ensuring that key themes—such as trip planning, memory documentation, journaling habits, and recommendation sharing—were consistently explored.
+
Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and was conducted either in person or via video call, depending on participant availability. The semi-structured format allowed for open-ended responses while ensuring that key themes, trip planning, memory documentation, journaling habits, and recommendation sharing were consistently addressed across all sessions.
  
−
To ensure consistency and completeness during the sessions, we created a Google Form for the interviewer to fill out during or immediately after each interview. This helped standardise data collection across participants and ensured that no key questions or observations were missed.
+
To maintain consistency and capture comprehensive data, a Google Form was created for the interviewer to fill out during or immediately after each session. This helped standardise the process and ensured that no essential questions or observations were missed.
−
With participant consent, all interviews were also audio recorded to allow for more detailed review and analysis. The collected data was later analysed using a thematic analysis approach, allowing us to identify recurring patterns, common frustrations, and unmet needs. These insights directly informed our design decisions for the proposed travel app.
+
 
 +
With participants' consent, all interviews were audio recorded to allow for detailed review and accurate data analysis. The qualitative data was then analysed thematically using Atlas.ti, which enabled us to identify recurring patterns, user frustrations, and unmet needs. These insights directly informed the design decisions and feature prioritisation for our proposed travel journal app.
  
 
====Participants====
 
====Participants====
Line 112: Line 112:
 
* '''Post-Trip Amnesia''': Difficulty recalling details after returning home.
 
* '''Post-Trip Amnesia''': Difficulty recalling details after returning home.
 
-----
 
-----
 +
 
===Sharing and Privacy===
 
===Sharing and Privacy===
  
Line 198: Line 199:
 
* '''Context-Aware Capture''': Use passive sensors to auto-capture moments without distracting the user.
 
* '''Context-Aware Capture''': Use passive sensors to auto-capture moments without distracting the user.
 
* '''Trip DNA Profiles''': Use machine learning to auto-generate journey summaries from fragmented inputs.
 
* '''Trip DNA Profiles''': Use machine learning to auto-generate journey summaries from fragmented inputs.
−
 
−
 
−
----
 
−
'''Travel Documentation Focus Group Plan (TEMP)'''
 
−
 
−
'''Overview'''
 
−
 
−
The '''Travel Documentation Focus Group Plan''' is designed to validate and expand upon findings from a contextual inquiry with 11 travelers (aged 22–36) regarding their habits, pain points, and preferences for documenting, sharing, and planning journeys. The goal is to inform the design of improved travel documentation tools.
 
−
 
−
'''Objectives'''
 
−
* Validate key pain points and user preferences
 
−
* Explore attitudes toward integrated documentation tools, privacy controls, and offline features
 
−
* Gather feedback on proposed feature opportunities
 
−
* Understand the diverse needs of user archetypes
 
−
 
−
'''Participant Recruitment'''
 
−
 
−
* '''Sample Size''': 8–10 participants per session (2 sessions recommended)
 
−
* '''Profile''': Travelers aged 22–36, representing four archetypes:
 
−
** Selective Sharers
 
−
** Memory Hoarders
 
−
** Experience Purists
 
−
** Content Creators
 
−
* '''Recruitment Channels''': Social media, travel forums, university networks, previous research participants
 
−
 
−
'''Session Structure'''
 
−
; Duration : 90 minutes
 
−
; Format : In-person or virtual (e.g., Zoom)
 
−
 
−
'''Introduction (10 min)'''
 
−
* Welcome, session purpose, confidentiality
 
−
* Participant introductions (name, recent trip, favorite documentation method)
 
−
'''
 
−
Warm-Up Discussion (10 min)'''
 
−
* "How do you usually document and share your trips?"
 
−
* "What tools/apps do you use and why?"
 
−
 
−
'''Deep Dive: Pain Points & Behaviours (20 min)'''
 
−
* Discuss fragmentation and switching between tools
 
−
* Explore privacy concerns and sharing habits
 
−
* Probe on post-trip recall and memory preservation
 
−
* "Can you recall a time when you struggled to find or share a travel memory?"
 
−
 
−
'''Feature Exploration (30 min)'''
 
−
* Present feature concepts (with visuals if possible):
 
−
** Auto-geotagged timeline
 
−
** Offline-first documentation
 
−
** Overlaying private notes on media
 
−
** Integrated maps and notes
 
−
** Granular privacy controls
 
−
** Trip DNA summaries
 
−
* Discussion prompts:
 
−
** "Which features excite you? Which feel unnecessary or intrusive?"
 
−
** "How would you use these in your own travel documentation?"
 
−
** "What would make you trust and adopt a new tool?"
 
−
 
−
'''Archetype Breakout (10 min)'''
 
−
* Small group discussions by self-identified archetype
 
−
* "What would your ideal documentation tool look like?"
 
−
 
−
'''Wrap-Up & Next Steps (10 min)'''
 
−
* Summarize key insights
 
−
* Invite final thoughts or feature suggestions
 
−
* Explain how feedback will be used
 
−
 
−
'''Materials Needed'''
 
−
* Visual mockups or storyboards of proposed features
 
−
* Digital or physical whiteboards
 
−
* Recording equipment (with consent)
 
−
* Pre-session questionnaire to assign archetypes
 
−
 
−
'''Key Questions
 
−
'''* Which pain points have the highest priority?
 
−
* How do users balance documentation and being present?
 
−
* What privacy controls are essential?
 
−
* How do different archetypes’ needs diverge?
 
−
* What would drive adoption of a new integrated tool?
 
−
 
−
'''Output and Next Steps'''
 
−
* Synthesize findings and map to archetypes and feature areas
 
−
* Refine feature concepts based on user input
 
−
* Prioritize development for MVP scope
 
−
 
−
'''Sample Focus Group Questions'''
 
−
* What frustrates you most about current travel documentation tools?
 
−
* How do you decide what to share publicly vs. privately?
 
−
* What would make you switch to a new documentation app?
 
−
* How important is offline functionality for you?
 
−
* What’s your biggest fear around sharing travel memories online?
 
−
* If you could wave a magic wand, what feature would you add to your favorite app?
 
  
 
==Conclusion==
 
==Conclusion==
Line 348: Line 259:
  
 
-Is there anything else you'd like to add or think we should know?
 
-Is there anything else you'd like to add or think we should know?
 +
 +
=Focus Group=
 +
==Objective==
 +
The focus group aimed to involve users in shaping distinctive, user-centred features for our travel documentation app.
 +
 +
Key objectives included:
 +
 +
*Exploring users’ travel habits, preferences, and pain points
 +
*Collecting suggestions on how these experiences could inform app features
 +
*Gathering feedback on four core features:
 +
#Auto-Geotagged Timeline
 +
#Privacy-Preserved Collaborative Planning
 +
#Offline-First Documentation
 +
#Private Notes on Media
 +
 +
*Encouraging participants to co-design feature concepts through sketching
 +
 +
*Identifying which features users find most valuable and engaging
 +
 +
==Method==
 +
 +
A focus group session was conducted with six participants, all of whom were students. One participant joined midway through the session. Participants were selected through an opportunistic sampling method. The session was structured into two interactive phases designed to understand user expectations, frustrations, and creative input around travel journaling features.
 +
 +
'''Phase 1: Exploratory Engagement & Wish Cards'''
 +
 +
The session began with a brief oral introduction outlining the purpose of the app and the goals of the focus group.
 +
 +
To initiate open dialogue and build rapport, participants were first asked general questions such as:
 +
“What do you like/dislike about travelling?”
 +
 +
Next, we introduced the Wish Cards Method, where participants responded to the prompt:
 +
“How do you wish to integrate your travel likes/dislikes into a travel app?”
 +
 +
Responses were written on sticky notes and categorised on a flipchart under suggestions and potential solutions, providing insight into user desires, pain points, and expectations.
 +
 +
'''Phase 2: Feature Co-Design via Gallery Method'''
 +
 +
In the second phase, we introduced four key feature areas of the proposed app, visualised on a flipchart. Participants shared their initial impressions and feedback on these features.
 +
 +
They were then divided into three pairs, and each group was assigned one feature to co-design using the Gallery Method. Participants were encouraged to sketch how the feature might look or function, focusing on:
 +
 +
*User Interface (UI) concepts
 +
*Feature flow or interaction process
 +
*Integration into the broader app ecosystem
 +
 +
After the sketching activity, each group presented their concepts to the larger group. The sketches and ideas were displayed on flipcharts, allowing for comparison and collective reflection. This collaborative co-design process offered insights into user priorities and usability expectations.
 +
 +
The entire session was audio recorded with participant consent, and all visual outputs (sticky notes and sketches) were retained for analysis. Data was analysed thematically using Atlas.ti, allowing us to identify recurring themes, preferences, and design considerations to inform further development of the app
 +
 +
'''Key Outcomes'''
 +
*Participants expressed strong interest in a "Group Trip Sharing" feature, particularly within the context of privacy-preserved collaboration.
 +
*Several participants suggested enhancing the Private Notes feature with options such as voice notes and checklists, emphasising the need for flexible, multimodal input.
 +
*A recurring critique was that the app felt too similar to existing platforms like Instagram or Apple Photos. However, this feedback proved valuable in highlighting the need for clearer differentiation and helped generate user-driven ideas for more distinctive, purpose-driven features.
 +
 +
These insights will be instrumental in shaping the design priorities and feature roadmap going forward.
 +
 +
'''Limitation'''
 +
#Small Sample Size: With only six participants (and one joining late), the range of perspectives was limited. The insights, while valuable, may not be representative of a broader user base.
 +
#Participant Familiarity: Not all participants were equally familiar with the app concept or features beforehand, which may have influenced the depth and focus of their input.
 +
#Group Dynamics: Due to group-based activities, dominant voices may have shaped certain discussions more than others, potentially affecting the diversity of ideas shared.
 +
#Lack of Iterative Testing: The session focused on idea generation and did not include usability testing or validation of sketched concepts, which limits conclusions about feasibility or desirability.
 +
#Mismatch with Defined Personas: Participants were not selected based on alignment with the pre-developed user personas. While this simplified recruitment, it limited the ability to directly connect focus group insights with specific persona needs and goals.
 +
 +
==Analysis==
 +
=== Analysis of Focus Group and Explored Feature Categories ===
 +
 +
==== Auto Geotagging & Timeline ====
 +
'''User Perceptions and Needs:'''
 +
* Participants appreciated automatic location tracking that creates a visual trip timeline with maps, photos, and notes.
 +
* Desired automation to stay "present in the moment" and avoid distraction from documentation.
 +
* Some questioned the uniqueness, citing apps like iPhone Memories and Instagram.
 +
* Suggested value in having a travel-specific focus or separating trips from general photo libraries.
 +
* Group sharing and collaborative timelines were considered desirable.
 +
 +
'''Concerns:'''
 +
* Privacy was a major concern, with apprehension about tracking and data storage.
 +
* Some users were indifferent to privacy risks, but most wanted clear control over shared content.
 +
* Wanted integration with phone gallery, not just the app’s camera.
 +
 +
'''Summary:'''
 +
* Attractive if it reduces manual effort and adds unique, travel-focused value, but must handle privacy and redundancy concerns.
 +
 +
=== Privacy – Permissions, Thoughts, and Views ===
 +
'''User Perceptions and Needs:'''
 +
* Privacy is fundamental; users want granular control over data visibility.
 +
* Preferred to limit visibility to specific individuals, not general groups like "friends of friends."
 +
* Wanted permission settings for each entry/photo.
 +
* Differentiated between corporate privacy (seen as compromised) and personal/social privacy (still valued).
 +
* Expected privacy controls on par with or better than Instagram.
 +
 +
'''Concerns:'''
 +
* Disliked broad sharing, “friends of friends” was viewed negatively.
 +
* Sceptical of whether a new app could outperform existing platforms on privacy.
 +
 +
'''Summary:'''
 +
* Travel apps must offer robust, transparent, and user-friendly privacy controls.
 +
 +
=== Offline Documentation ===
 +
'''User Perceptions and Needs:'''
 +
* Essential for travel in low-connectivity areas, compared to “Google Docs offline mode.”
 +
* Desired ability to take notes, tag photos, and add content offline.
 +
* Wanted to link gallery photos to locations later, shouldn’t be limited to app’s camera.
 +
* Envisioned group collaboration, shared timelines or trip notes.
 +
 +
'''Concerns:'''
 +
* Wanted minimal phone interaction—offline features should be seamless and unobtrusive.
 +
 +
'''Summary:'''
 +
* Offline documentation must be intuitive, robust, and support both solo and group use with minimal disruption.
 +
 +
=== Private Notes ===
 +
'''User Perceptions and Needs:'''
 +
* Least enthusiasm, many saw note-taking as work that detracts from enjoyment.
 +
* Acknowledged potential value for influencers/content creators.
 +
* If included, should be quick and easy, voice/sketch input preferred.
 +
 +
'''Concerns:'''
 +
* Avoid features that feel like chores or disrupt the experience.
 +
 +
'''Summary:'''
 +
* Niche appeal, should be optional, quick, and non-intrusive if implemented.
 +
 +
=== Cross-Category Insights ===
 +
* '''Automation vs. Authenticity:''' Users want automatic capture to stay engaged in real experiences.
 +
* '''Privacy as a Core Value:''' Strong expectations for granular, transparent controls.
 +
* '''Group Travel Dynamics:''' Strong interest in collaborative tools like shared notes and timelines.
 +
* '''Differentiation from Existing Apps:''' Users demand features that go beyond existing platforms in summarizing and organizing travel content.
 +
 +
==== Pain Point-Motivation Matrix Analysis ====
 +
 +
==== Pain Points (Sticky Note Categories) ====
 +
* '''Logistical Challenges:'''
 +
** “Researching places to go”, “Costing a lot of money”, “Packing & Forgetting things”
 +
** High-priority, solvable issues (Yellow notes)
 +
* '''Emotional Discomfort:'''
 +
** “Feeling lost”, “Being confused”, “Being uncomfortable”, “Cleaning concerns”, “Unexpected delays”
 +
** Psychological barriers captured in pink sticky notes
 +
* '''Decision Fatigue:'''
 +
** “Deciding when is the most convenient time to travel”, “Finding decent prices”
 +
** Overwhelm from too many options (Multiple pink notes)
 +
 +
==== Motivations (Love-Centered) ====
 +
* '''Authentic Experience Seeking:'''
 +
** “Seeing authentic local people in action” was prominent
 +
** Strong motivator over typical tourist attractions
 +
* '''Social Documentation:'''
 +
** “Girly pics for social media” balanced between authenticity and shareability
 +
* '''Cultural Exploration:'''
 +
** Interest in “new food”, “how other people live”, “foreign sights”
 +
** Motivated by curiosity and learning
 +
 +
==== Core User Archetype ====
 +
* Loves travel (high “Love” note placement) but is overwhelmed by logistics (many yellow pain points).
 +
* Wants to be present while still capturing and sharing memories (social sharing themes).
 +
* Values authentic experiences but needs practical support.
 +
* Strong desire for privacy control while staying socially connected.
  
 
=Personas=
 
=Personas=
  
−
The following Personas were created using the data collected for CI and its analysis was done in Atlas.
+
The following Personas were created using the data collected for CI and its analysis was done in Atlas.ti.
  
 
[[File:Personas-1.jpeg|500px|Left|]]
 
[[File:Personas-1.jpeg|500px|Left|]]
Line 359: Line 426:
 
[[File:Personas-5.jpg|500px|Left|]]
 
[[File:Personas-5.jpg|500px|Left|]]
  
−
=Scenarios & User Stories=
+
=Scenarios=
 +
These scenarios are based on the Personas.
 +
 
 +
[[File:Scenario.jpg|500px|Right]]
  
 
=Compile Table=
 
=Compile Table=
 +
 +
The Compile Table is also based on the Persons
  
 
[[File:Compile Table.jpeg|700px|Left]]
 
[[File:Compile Table.jpeg|700px|Left]]
  
 
=App Prototype=
 
=App Prototype=
 +
 +
https://maja-wanderlust-chronicles.lovable.app/
  
 
=Conclusion=
 
=Conclusion=
 +
Through a rigorous process of research, data analysis and implementation, we created an app prototype that we believe is well-suited for its purpose: making the experience before, during, and after a trip easier and more enjoyable.
 +
 +
Our contextual inquiry and focus group gave us an abundance of insights into the problems commonly faced during travel, allowing us to make design decisions with a degree of specificity and confidence that would not otherwise have been possible. Similarly, we were able to take that data and use it to change the priorities of the app-- for example, privacy was revealed to be a top priority for most participants.
 +
 +
There were certainly obstacles along the way that we had to navigate through to get here, though. For one, organization of responsibilities within the group could have been defined more clearly before we began. This would allow us to work more efficiently and not have confusion about who is supposed to do what and when. Having a regular meeting time may have been beneficial, but likely would have presented its own logistical challenges; after all, we are students who have other classes, jobs, and responsibilities outside of this project.
 +
 +
=Presentation Link=
  
−
=References=
+
Find Link here [https://www.canva.com/design/DAGsegdVa-E/qOnU2-3n8mq4JB0u4aLDwg/edit?utm_content=DAGsegdVa-E&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton]
  
 
=Group Members=
 
=Group Members=

Latest revision as of 10:30, 14 August 2025

Description

Maja2.png

About

Goal of the App: To help travellers effortlessly document and share their journeys by integrating visual storytelling (photos), private reflections (notes), travel planning (itineraries), and public recommendations, all linked to an interactive map. Users can review and share the highlights of their trip using a comprehensive review utility.

Similar Apps

As inspiration for our travel app, we examined similar travel journal apps and identified both limitations and valuable features that we aim to address and incorporate into our own concept.

Polarsteps

Polarsteps is a free travel app designed to help you plan, track, and relive your journeys in a visually engaging and effortless way. It's ideal for travellers who want to document their adventures without the hassle of manual journaling.

Main features

Automatic Travel Tracking: Polarsteps uses your phone’s location data to automatically log your route, even when offline. It syncs once you're back online, ensuring your journey is captured without draining your battery.

Digital Travel Journal: You can add photos, notes, and details to each stop on your trip, creating a personalised digital scrapbook. Each location is marked as a “step,” building a visual timeline of your travels.

Trip Planning Tools: Plan future adventures using the itinerary and transport planners. Polarsteps also offers curated travel guides with insider tips from editors and fellow travellers.

Share Your Journey: Share your trips with friends and family via private links—no account needed for viewers. You can also follow other travellers and keep your adventures private or public

Travel Book Creation: After your trip, transform your digital journal into a printed hardcover travel book—a popular feature among users.

Inspirations out of Polarsteps

From the Polarsteps app, we aim to adopt key features such as the interactive map, the trip planning functionality, and the ability to share one’s journey either privately or publicly with friends.

Additionally, the option to attach photos and notes to each step of the travel experience was particularly relevant and inspiring for the concept of our own travel app.

Travelboast

TravelBoast is a creative mobile application that enables users to craft animated travel routes, ideal for sharing on social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube Shorts. The app allows you to input your journey details and generates a dynamic animation of your trip, complete with customizable vehicles and routes.

Main features

Animated Travel Routes: Design engaging animations by selecting your start and end points, adding intermediate stops, and choosing from over 100 transport options—including cars, boats, trains, planes, and even imaginative vehicles like UFOs and dragons.

Customizable Visuals: Personalise your animations with various map styles, vehicle types, and special effects to reflect the unique aspects of your journey.

Social Media Integration: Easily share your animated travel stories directly to social media platforms, enhancing your posts with visually appealing content.

User-Friendly Interface: With an intuitive design, users can quickly create and share their travel animations, making the app accessible to both tech-savvy individuals and those less familiar with mobile applications.

Inspirations out of Travelboast

A nice-looking story of a past journey with animations and music options to share on other platforms like social media.

Contextual Inquiry

Objectives

  • Observe how travellers document and share their journeys in real-life or simulated contexts.
  • Identify pain points and limitations in existing tools and journaling processes.
  • Explore how users plan trips, reflect on experiences, and give/share recommendations.
  • Understand user behaviours, motivations, and preferences around privacy, storytelling, and public sharing.

Method

To explore how users currently document and share their travel experiences, we conducted a Contextual Inquiry using semi-structured interviews as the primary method. This approach enabled us to gain in-depth insights into real user behaviours, motivations, and pain points within their natural or simulated travel contexts.

We recruited 11 participants using an opportunistic sampling method, focusing on individuals who had either recently completed a trip or were actively engaged in travel. The sample included a diverse mix of travel styles, such as solo travellers, frequent business travellers, and those travelling with friends or partners.

Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and was conducted either in person or via video call, depending on participant availability. The semi-structured format allowed for open-ended responses while ensuring that key themes, trip planning, memory documentation, journaling habits, and recommendation sharing were consistently addressed across all sessions.

To maintain consistency and capture comprehensive data, a Google Form was created for the interviewer to fill out during or immediately after each session. This helped standardise the process and ensured that no essential questions or observations were missed.

With participants' consent, all interviews were audio recorded to allow for detailed review and accurate data analysis. The qualitative data was then analysed thematically using Atlas.ti, which enabled us to identify recurring patterns, user frustrations, and unmet needs. These insights directly informed the design decisions and feature prioritisation for our proposed travel journal app.

Participants

We recruited a total of 11 participants, all of whom were either frequent travelers or individuals who had recently completed a trip. The goal was to ensure relevance and freshness of experience in relation to travel journaling, planning, and sharing habits. Participants were selected to represent a diverse range of travel styles, including solo travellers, leisure travellers, business travellers, and students. This diversity allowed us to capture a wide spectrum of user needs, preferences, and challenges. All participants were briefed about the purpose of the study and gave informed consent before the interviews, including permission to record the sessions for research purposes.

Limitations

While the contextual inquiry provided valuable insights into user behaviours and pain points, several limitations should be noted:

  1. Sample Size and Diversity: The number of participants was limited, which may not fully capture the breadth of travel styles, age groups, or cultural differences. As a result, the findings may not be generalizable to all user segments.
  2. Simulated Contexts: Some interviews were conducted post-travel or in simulated planning scenarios rather than during actual travel. This may have influenced the accuracy or depth of recalled behaviours.
  3. Interviewer Bias: Although a structured Google Form was used, the presence of the interviewer and subjective interpretation during observations and analysis may have introduced bias.
  4. Technology-Comfort Bias: Most participants were relatively comfortable with technology, which may have excluded insights from less tech-savvy users who could struggle with app-based travel journaling.

Analysis of CI

Overview

Synthesized findings from a contextual inquiry conducted with 11 travellers aged 22–36, focusing on how they document, share, and plan their journeys. The research aimed to identify pain points, preferences, and opportunities for improving travel documentation tools.

Key Findings

Documentation Habits

Primary Tools

  • Smartphone Photos: Used by nearly all participants for basic documentation.
  • Google Maps: Widely used for location tracking, saving spots, and sometimes for adding private notes.
  • Notes Apps & Google Docs: For detailed notes, impressions, and trip planning.
  • Specialized Apps: Some use apps like Polarsteps, Outdooractive, or “Visited” for tracking and sharing.

Hybrid Approaches: Many combine multiple tools (e.g., Instagram + Notes + Google Maps) to capture different aspects of their trips.

Pain Points

  • Fragmentation: Need to use several apps for planning, documenting, and sharing.
  • Manual Geotagging: Some manually add locations to Google Docs or Sheets, despite automatic GPS features.
  • Post-Trip Amnesia: Difficulty recalling details after returning home.

Sharing and Privacy

Sharing Preferences

  • Private Sharing: Mostly with family and close friends via WhatsApp, email, or private albums.
  • Public Sharing: Some share on Instagram, YouTube, or Facebook, but with varying degrees of openness.
  • Selective Sharing: Many use Instagram’s “Close Friends” feature or direct messages for curated sharing.

Privacy Concerns

  • Granular Control: Desire to share certain content publicly (e.g., hiking photos) while keeping other details private (e.g., restaurant recommendations).
  • Safety: A few avoid sharing location details entirely for safety reasons.
  • Private Notes: Some keep private notes for personal reflection or future content creation.

Trip Planning

Planning Tools

  • Google Maps: Most popular for marking and organizing places to visit.
  • Booking Platforms: Airbnb, Booking.com, and A&O Hostels for accommodations.
  • Social Media & Blogs: Instagram, Pinterest, and travel blogs for inspiration and itineraries.
  • Word of Mouth: Recommendations from friends and family.
  • ChatGPT: Used for generating ideas and itineraries.

Planning Pain Points

  • Information Overload: Too many resources can make planning confusing.
  • Decision Paralysis: Difficulty balancing depth and duration, especially with limited time.
  • Credibility Gaps: Distrust of influencer recommendations; preference for Google reviews or local insights.

User Behaviours and Motivations

Motivations

  • Memory Preservation: Documenting to remember experiences and share with loved ones.
  • Community Engagement: Sharing publicly to connect with others or build a following.
  • Personal Reflection: Keeping private notes for self-reflection or future reference.

Pain Points

  • Distraction: Concern that documentation tools distract from enjoying the moment.
  • Platform Lock-In: Content stranded in discontinued apps.
  • Offline Functionality: Need for tools that work in remote areas without internet.

Feature Opportunities

  • Auto-geotagged timeline
User Value: Reduces manual tagging effort
  • Privacy-preserved collaborative planning
User Value: Enables group trips without oversharing
  • Offline-first documentation
User Value: Supports remote area usage
  • Overlay private notes on photos/videos
User Value: Streamlines reflection and sharing
  • Integration with maps for geotagging
User Value: Enhances context and organization

Rejected Features

  • Mandatory Social Sharing: Most oppose being forced to share publicly
  • In-App Advertising: Many dislike ads and find them distracting
  • Public Follower Counts: Considered unnecessary and potentially distracting

User Archetypes

  • Selective Sharer
Description: Shares selectively with close contacts, values privacy
Example Behaviours: Uses WhatsApp, IG Close Friends
  • Memory Hoarder
Description: Documents extensively but shares little publicly
Example Behaviours: Keeps private notes, shares <20% content
  • Experience Purist
Description: Minimizes documentation to stay present
Example Behaviours: Rarely uses apps, focuses on experience
  • Content Creator
Description: Shares publicly for audience engagement, keeps private notes for content
Example Behaviours: Uses YouTube, IG, private notes

Recommendations

  • Integrated Documentation: Develop tools that combine photos, notes, recommendations, and maps in one interface.
  • Granular Privacy Controls: Allow users to control who sees each piece of content.
  • Offline Functionality: Ensure tools work without internet for remote travel.
  • Context-Aware Capture: Use passive sensors to auto-capture moments without distracting the user.
  • Trip DNA Profiles: Use machine learning to auto-generate journey summaries from fragmented inputs.

Conclusion

Travellers want integrated, easy-to-use tools that respect their privacy and reduce cognitive load. Successful solutions will bridge the gap between rich media capture and authentic experience preservation, while offering flexible sharing and robust offline capabilities.

Interview Questionnaire

Google Form

1. Travel Habits

-How old are you?

-How often do you travel?

-Do you usually travel solo, in a group, or both?

-What type of trips do you usually take? (e.g. backpacking, city trips, digital nomad, road trips, etc.)

-How long are your trips?

2. Travel Documentation

-How do you currently document your trips? (Apps, journals, social media, photos only, etc.)

-Can you walk me through how you documented your last trip?

-What tools or apps do you use (if any)? (e.g. Polarsteps, Instagram, Google Docs, Notes app, written diary)

-What do you like about those tools?

-What annoys or frustrates you about them?

3. Sharing & Privacy

-Do you share your travel experiences with others? If yes, how and where?

-Who do you share your content with? (Public, friends, family, just for yourself)

-Do you ever keep private notes during a trip? Why or why not?

-How important is privacy to you when documenting a trip?

4. Planning & Inspiration

-How do you usually plan your trips? (Apps, blogs, word of mouth)

-Do you look at other people’s travel stories or recommendations while planning?

-Would it help to see what others enjoyed in a place you're going to?

5. Feature Feedback

-If you had an app where you could combine: Photo sharing, Private notes, Recommendations from others, Public/Private modes. Would that be useful for you? Why or why not?

-What one feature would you love in a travel app?

-What feature would you definitely not want?

-Is there anything else you'd like to add or think we should know?

Focus Group

Objective

The focus group aimed to involve users in shaping distinctive, user-centred features for our travel documentation app.

Key objectives included:

  • Exploring users’ travel habits, preferences, and pain points
  • Collecting suggestions on how these experiences could inform app features
  • Gathering feedback on four core features:
  1. Auto-Geotagged Timeline
  2. Privacy-Preserved Collaborative Planning
  3. Offline-First Documentation
  4. Private Notes on Media
  • Encouraging participants to co-design feature concepts through sketching
  • Identifying which features users find most valuable and engaging

Method

A focus group session was conducted with six participants, all of whom were students. One participant joined midway through the session. Participants were selected through an opportunistic sampling method. The session was structured into two interactive phases designed to understand user expectations, frustrations, and creative input around travel journaling features.

Phase 1: Exploratory Engagement & Wish Cards

The session began with a brief oral introduction outlining the purpose of the app and the goals of the focus group.

To initiate open dialogue and build rapport, participants were first asked general questions such as: “What do you like/dislike about travelling?”

Next, we introduced the Wish Cards Method, where participants responded to the prompt: “How do you wish to integrate your travel likes/dislikes into a travel app?”

Responses were written on sticky notes and categorised on a flipchart under suggestions and potential solutions, providing insight into user desires, pain points, and expectations.

Phase 2: Feature Co-Design via Gallery Method

In the second phase, we introduced four key feature areas of the proposed app, visualised on a flipchart. Participants shared their initial impressions and feedback on these features.

They were then divided into three pairs, and each group was assigned one feature to co-design using the Gallery Method. Participants were encouraged to sketch how the feature might look or function, focusing on:

  • User Interface (UI) concepts
  • Feature flow or interaction process
  • Integration into the broader app ecosystem

After the sketching activity, each group presented their concepts to the larger group. The sketches and ideas were displayed on flipcharts, allowing for comparison and collective reflection. This collaborative co-design process offered insights into user priorities and usability expectations.

The entire session was audio recorded with participant consent, and all visual outputs (sticky notes and sketches) were retained for analysis. Data was analysed thematically using Atlas.ti, allowing us to identify recurring themes, preferences, and design considerations to inform further development of the app

Key Outcomes

  • Participants expressed strong interest in a "Group Trip Sharing" feature, particularly within the context of privacy-preserved collaboration.
  • Several participants suggested enhancing the Private Notes feature with options such as voice notes and checklists, emphasising the need for flexible, multimodal input.
  • A recurring critique was that the app felt too similar to existing platforms like Instagram or Apple Photos. However, this feedback proved valuable in highlighting the need for clearer differentiation and helped generate user-driven ideas for more distinctive, purpose-driven features.

These insights will be instrumental in shaping the design priorities and feature roadmap going forward.

Limitation

  1. Small Sample Size: With only six participants (and one joining late), the range of perspectives was limited. The insights, while valuable, may not be representative of a broader user base.
  2. Participant Familiarity: Not all participants were equally familiar with the app concept or features beforehand, which may have influenced the depth and focus of their input.
  3. Group Dynamics: Due to group-based activities, dominant voices may have shaped certain discussions more than others, potentially affecting the diversity of ideas shared.
  4. Lack of Iterative Testing: The session focused on idea generation and did not include usability testing or validation of sketched concepts, which limits conclusions about feasibility or desirability.
  5. Mismatch with Defined Personas: Participants were not selected based on alignment with the pre-developed user personas. While this simplified recruitment, it limited the ability to directly connect focus group insights with specific persona needs and goals.

Analysis

Analysis of Focus Group and Explored Feature Categories

Auto Geotagging & Timeline

User Perceptions and Needs:

  • Participants appreciated automatic location tracking that creates a visual trip timeline with maps, photos, and notes.
  • Desired automation to stay "present in the moment" and avoid distraction from documentation.
  • Some questioned the uniqueness, citing apps like iPhone Memories and Instagram.
  • Suggested value in having a travel-specific focus or separating trips from general photo libraries.
  • Group sharing and collaborative timelines were considered desirable.

Concerns:

  • Privacy was a major concern, with apprehension about tracking and data storage.
  • Some users were indifferent to privacy risks, but most wanted clear control over shared content.
  • Wanted integration with phone gallery, not just the app’s camera.

Summary:

  • Attractive if it reduces manual effort and adds unique, travel-focused value, but must handle privacy and redundancy concerns.

Privacy – Permissions, Thoughts, and Views

User Perceptions and Needs:

  • Privacy is fundamental; users want granular control over data visibility.
  • Preferred to limit visibility to specific individuals, not general groups like "friends of friends."
  • Wanted permission settings for each entry/photo.
  • Differentiated between corporate privacy (seen as compromised) and personal/social privacy (still valued).
  • Expected privacy controls on par with or better than Instagram.

Concerns:

  • Disliked broad sharing, “friends of friends” was viewed negatively.
  • Sceptical of whether a new app could outperform existing platforms on privacy.

Summary:

  • Travel apps must offer robust, transparent, and user-friendly privacy controls.

Offline Documentation

User Perceptions and Needs:

  • Essential for travel in low-connectivity areas, compared to “Google Docs offline mode.”
  • Desired ability to take notes, tag photos, and add content offline.
  • Wanted to link gallery photos to locations later, shouldn’t be limited to app’s camera.
  • Envisioned group collaboration, shared timelines or trip notes.

Concerns:

  • Wanted minimal phone interaction—offline features should be seamless and unobtrusive.

Summary:

  • Offline documentation must be intuitive, robust, and support both solo and group use with minimal disruption.

Private Notes

User Perceptions and Needs:

  • Least enthusiasm, many saw note-taking as work that detracts from enjoyment.
  • Acknowledged potential value for influencers/content creators.
  • If included, should be quick and easy, voice/sketch input preferred.

Concerns:

  • Avoid features that feel like chores or disrupt the experience.

Summary:

  • Niche appeal, should be optional, quick, and non-intrusive if implemented.

Cross-Category Insights

  • Automation vs. Authenticity: Users want automatic capture to stay engaged in real experiences.
  • Privacy as a Core Value: Strong expectations for granular, transparent controls.
  • Group Travel Dynamics: Strong interest in collaborative tools like shared notes and timelines.
  • Differentiation from Existing Apps: Users demand features that go beyond existing platforms in summarizing and organizing travel content.

Pain Point-Motivation Matrix Analysis

Pain Points (Sticky Note Categories)

  • Logistical Challenges:
    • “Researching places to go”, “Costing a lot of money”, “Packing & Forgetting things”
    • High-priority, solvable issues (Yellow notes)
  • Emotional Discomfort:
    • “Feeling lost”, “Being confused”, “Being uncomfortable”, “Cleaning concerns”, “Unexpected delays”
    • Psychological barriers captured in pink sticky notes
  • Decision Fatigue:
    • “Deciding when is the most convenient time to travel”, “Finding decent prices”
    • Overwhelm from too many options (Multiple pink notes)

Motivations (Love-Centered)

  • Authentic Experience Seeking:
    • “Seeing authentic local people in action” was prominent
    • Strong motivator over typical tourist attractions
  • Social Documentation:
    • “Girly pics for social media” balanced between authenticity and shareability
  • Cultural Exploration:
    • Interest in “new food”, “how other people live”, “foreign sights”
    • Motivated by curiosity and learning

Core User Archetype

  • Loves travel (high “Love” note placement) but is overwhelmed by logistics (many yellow pain points).
  • Wants to be present while still capturing and sharing memories (social sharing themes).
  • Values authentic experiences but needs practical support.
  • Strong desire for privacy control while staying socially connected.

Personas

The following Personas were created using the data collected for CI and its analysis was done in Atlas.ti.

Personas-1.jpeg Personas-2.jpg Personas-3.jpg Personas-4.jpg Personas-5.jpg

Scenarios

These scenarios are based on the Personas.

Right

Compile Table

The Compile Table is also based on the Persons

Left

App Prototype

https://maja-wanderlust-chronicles.lovable.app/

Conclusion

Through a rigorous process of research, data analysis and implementation, we created an app prototype that we believe is well-suited for its purpose: making the experience before, during, and after a trip easier and more enjoyable.

Our contextual inquiry and focus group gave us an abundance of insights into the problems commonly faced during travel, allowing us to make design decisions with a degree of specificity and confidence that would not otherwise have been possible. Similarly, we were able to take that data and use it to change the priorities of the app-- for example, privacy was revealed to be a top priority for most participants.

There were certainly obstacles along the way that we had to navigate through to get here, though. For one, organization of responsibilities within the group could have been defined more clearly before we began. This would allow us to work more efficiently and not have confusion about who is supposed to do what and when. Having a regular meeting time may have been beneficial, but likely would have presented its own logistical challenges; after all, we are students who have other classes, jobs, and responsibilities outside of this project.

Presentation Link

Find Link here [1]

Group Members

  • Abhidnya Girme
  • Anders Umholtz
  • Justin Greegor
  • Julian Wiegand
  • Marwa Shaaban
Retrieved from "http://ux.kolrep.de/index.php?title=MAJA_Travel_App&oldid=4786"