Page 1


Aalborg University Copenhagen

Semester: 2 Title: Crime Investigations

Aalborg University Copenhagen A.C. Meyers Vænge 15, 2450 Copenhagen SV, Denmark

Project period: 1 February 2016 — 24 May 2016

Secretary: Pia Skovlund Jensen Phone: 9940 2582 psj@staff.aau.dk

Semester theme: Human-Computer Interaction Abstract:

Supervisor(s): Ali Adjorlu

Project group no.: 202 Members: Anders Ipsen Jan Kanty Janiszewski Joakim Carlsen Lukas Jørgensen Mikkel Thynov Nicolai Grum Tobias Larsen

This study examines the possibility to decrease sedentary behaviour amongst teenagers between 16-19 year old. Sedentary behaviour has proven to be associated with many serious health risks. Motivation and user experience were the key elements when researching possibilities to produce a testable prototype. Using research of Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation as well as the Flow Theory, a game was setup to facilitate a fun intrinsically motivating experience. The user experience was tested through two iterations where the prototype was redesigned to fit the user’s needs. 3D objects generated by Augmented Reality let the users explore crime scenes by moving their phone and interacting with objects to learn more about suspects and clues. The results implicate that the participants felt very motivated to play the game.

Copies: Copyright © 2015. This report and/or appended material may not be partly or completely published or copied w ithout prior Pages: written approval from the authors. Neither may the contents be used for commercial purposes without this written approval. Finished:


Contents 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Initial Problem Statement ........................................................................................................................................ 5 2. Analysis............................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Sedentary Behaviour ................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.1 Consequences of being Sedentary ............................................................................................................... 8 2.1.2 Previous Studies and Interventions ............................................................................................................ 8 2.1.3 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................10 2.2 Target Group..............................................................................................................................................................11 2.2.1 Researching the target group ......................................................................................................................11 2.2.2 Target Group Definition ................................................................................................................................13 2.3 Motivation ..................................................................................................................................................................14 2.3.1 What is motivation? .......................................................................................................................................14 2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation........................................................................................................................................14 2.3.3 Extrinsic motivation .......................................................................................................................................16 2.3.4 Comparing the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation ...............................................................17 2.3.5 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................18 2.4 Game Theories ...........................................................................................................................................................19 2.4.1 Game Elements ................................................................................................................................................19 2.5 SOTA .............................................................................................................................................................................21 2.5.1 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................21 2.6 Sensors in Smartphones ..........................................................................................................................................22 2.6.1 Smartphone sensors.......................................................................................................................................22 2.6.2 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................24 2.7 Augmented Reality ...................................................................................................................................................25 2.7.1 How it works ....................................................................................................................................................25 2.7.2 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................25 2.8 UX for mobile devices ...............................................................................................................................................26 2.8.1 User Experience...............................................................................................................................................26 2.8.2 The Layer Process Model..............................................................................................................................26 2.8.3 Seven Stages of action....................................................................................................................................27 2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design .................................................................................................28 2.8.5 Sub Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................29 2.9 Analysis Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................30 3. FPS & Req Spec ............................................................................................................................................................. 31 3.1 Final Problem Statement ........................................................................................................................................31 3.2 Requirement Specification .....................................................................................................................................31 4. Methods ........................................................................................................................................................................... 32 5. 1st Iteration ................................................................................................................................................................... 35 5.1 Strategy .......................................................................................................................................................................35 5.1.1 App Concept......................................................................................................................................................35 5.1.2 Story Concept ...................................................................................................................................................36 5.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................................................36 5.4 Skeleton .......................................................................................................................................................................40 5.4.1 The App skeleton.............................................................................................................................................40 5.4.2 The Game skeleton .........................................................................................................................................43 5.5.1 Theme .................................................................................................................................................................44

1


5.5.2 Implementation ...............................................................................................................................................44 5.6 Evaluation...................................................................................................................................................................46 5.6.1 Theory.................................................................................................................................................................46 5.6.2 Low Fidelity Prototype Usability Test ......................................................................................................47 5.6.3 Results ................................................................................................................................................................47 6. 2nd Iteration ................................................................................................................................................................. 49 6.2 Design ..........................................................................................................................................................................50 6.3 Surface .........................................................................................................................................................................51 6.3.1 Theme .................................................................................................................................................................51 6.3.2 Flat Design .........................................................................................................................................................51 6.3.3 Colour scheme..................................................................................................................................................52 6.4 Participatory design ................................................................................................................................................52 6.4.1 What is participatory design .......................................................................................................................52 6.4.2 Objectives and Execution..............................................................................................................................53 6.4.3 Results and discussion ..................................................................................................................................53 6.5 Implementation.........................................................................................................................................................54 6.5.1 High-fidelity prototype..................................................................................................................................54 6.5.2 Visual Production ............................................................................................................................................54 6.5.3 Unity ....................................................................................................................................................................58 6.5.4 Asset Store & 3D Warehouse .......................................................................................................................58 6.5.5 Virtual buttons .................................................................................................................................................58 6.5.6 Timer...................................................................................................................................................................61 6.5.7 Swipe...................................................................................................................................................................62 6.5.8 Vuforia ................................................................................................................................................................62 6.6.1 Theory.................................................................................................................................................................65 6.6.2 Test Setting .......................................................................................................................................................66 6.6.3 High Fidelity Prototype Evaluation ...........................................................................................................67 7. 3rd Iteration .................................................................................................................................................................. 70 7.2 Design ..........................................................................................................................................................................72 7.3 Skeleton .......................................................................................................................................................................72 7.3.1 Help Screen .......................................................................................................................................................72 7.4 Implementation.........................................................................................................................................................74 7.4.1 Objectives ..........................................................................................................................................................74 7.4.2 Better swipe ......................................................................................................................................................76 7.4.3 Help screen........................................................................................................................................................78 7.4.4 Tap on characters............................................................................................................................................79 7.4.5 Loading screen .................................................................................................................................................80 7.5 Final Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................................82 7.5.1 Evaluation Design ...........................................................................................................................................82 7.5.2 Theory.................................................................................................................................................................82 7.5.3 Setting .................................................................................................................................................................83 7.5.4 Questionnaire ...................................................................................................................................................83 7.5.5 Sampling ............................................................................................................................................................84 7.5.6 Results ................................................................................................................................................................84 7.6 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................................87 7.6.1 Analysis of the results....................................................................................................................................87 7.6.2 Validity and Bias ..............................................................................................................................................88 8. Re-design ........................................................................................................................................................................ 90 8.1 Timer ......................................................................................................................................................................90 8.2 End Investigation button..................................................................................................................................90

2


8.3 Score .......................................................................................................................................................................90 9. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................................... 91 10. Future Works ............................................................................................................................................................. 92 Reference List .................................................................................................................................................................... 93 Appendix 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 98 Appendix 2 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 99 Appendix 3 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 100 Appendix 4 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 104 Appendix 5 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 108 Appendix 6 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 109 Appendix 7 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 110 Appendix 8 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 111 Appendix 9 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 112 Appendix 10 .................................................................................................................................................................... 113 Appendix 11 .................................................................................................................................................................... 114 Appendix 12 .................................................................................................................................................................... 115 Appendix 13 .................................................................................................................................................................... 116 Appendix 14 .................................................................................................................................................................... 119 Appendix 15 .................................................................................................................................................................... 120 Appendix 16 .................................................................................................................................................................... 122 Appendix 17 .................................................................................................................................................................... 123 Appendix 18 .................................................................................................................................................................... 127 Appendix 19 .................................................................................................................................................................... 131 Appendix 20 .................................................................................................................................................................... 132 Appendix 21 .................................................................................................................................................................... 133 Appendix 22 .................................................................................................................................................................... 137

3


1. Introduction The Danish everyday life is affected by a sedentary behaviour. A sedentary behaviour can be defined as a part of our time, in which we are awake in a sitting or lying position, where the main parts of our body’s musculature are resting ( Overgaard et al., 2012). This behaviour has increased in recent years and according to Overgaard et al. (2012) the most exposed social groups in Denmark are young people between 16 and 24, and adults including 55 and above. Studies show that sedentary behaviour can be connected to increased mortality, obesity, mental diseases (Overgaard et al., 2012) and cardiovascular diseases (Warren et al., 2010). Further studies also show that long term sedentary behaviour over a short time can activate certain biological processes, which weaken the muscles, bones and blood circulation in the human body; these biological processes can in a certain amount be antagonised through physical activity (Overgaard et al., 2012). Appendix 1 shows that 30% of the young population in the previously mentioned social groups spend more than 4 hours on sedentary activities at home, while the percentage rises up to 50% for the older social groups of 55 and above (Overgaard et al., 2012). There are different factors influencing this behaviour, but one of the main reasons can be that it is much easier and entertaining to sit and play videogames or watch television than to go outside or be creative. They are not motivated to break their sedentary behaviour and start exercising more. Motivation is what drives people to act. Without motivation no one would exercise, run or go for a walk in the park. Changing sedentary behaviour to a more active lifestyle requires one to be thoroughly motivated. Research shows that motivation can be increased intrinsically through autonomy, competence and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). These factors can motivate people to act and maintain their interest for a longer period of time. Using theories to increase the motivation as an opposing factor against the consequences of a sedentary life, might be a solution that can work towards a healthier population. Technology is part of the reason why some people fall into a sedentary behaviour, but perhaps technology can be part of the solution to the problem.

4


1.1 Initial Problem Statement Based on the knowledge of the subject at this point, the initial problem statement looks like the following: “How can a mobile app motivate teens with a sedentary lifestyle to be more physically active?�

5


2. Analysis 2.1 Sedentary Behaviour Sedentary behaviour has been ranked as the fourth leading risk factor for global mortality by The World Health Organisation (WHO), only surpassed by high blood pressure, tobacco and high blood glucose (Selby, 2015). As stated in the introduction, sedentary behaviour is defined as doing activities with low energy consumption, like sitting or lying down while awake (Overgaard et al., 2012). In general sedentary behaviour is seen amongst most age groups, but primarily two groups are prominent; young people from 16-24 and adults from 55 and above. The diagram in figure 2.1 shows a larger percentage of sedentary habits of the aforementioned age groups compared to other. 30% of the young people use more than four hours, on a daily basis, doing sedentary activities. When the age rises, the percentage declines until the age of 55 and above, where it begins to surpass the young people at 30%. The diagram reveals that the age groups of 25-54 have a smaller percentage, and will not be as relevant as the two categorised age groups.

Figure 2.1 Table derived from Overgaard et al. (2012)

According to Overgaard et al. (2012) there is a connection between screen time and sedentary behaviour, since screen time is primarily considered a sedentary action. Screen time is defined by the amount of hours spent in front of a screen i.e. TV, computer, smartphone etc. Figure 2.2 shows that screen time for children has increased in the recent years and sedentary behaviour has thus increased along with it.

6


Figure 2.2 Daily Screen-Based Activity of U.S. Children (Lou, 2014)

Studies performed on young people from both Canada and the U.S. show that sedentary actions are an increasing trend amongst 6-19 year olds. In Canada young people spend an average of 8.6 hours each day being sedentary. This corresponds to 62% of their waking hours, of which they spend being sedentary. Similarly young people in the U.S. spend on average 6-8 hours per day also being sedentary (Tremblay et al., 2011). The trends are widespread and the same trends are seen amongst Danish young people (Overgaard et al., 2012). The young age group is the most interesting to look at since it is a greater consumer of technology. Prensky (2001) refers to people who are born after the widespread adoption of digital technology as digital natives and people who are born before as digital immigrants. Since the young age group has been raised with technology around them they can be seen as digital natives, and will therefore have an easier time implementing technology into their life. The older

7


age groups can be categorised as digital immigrants since they have not been brought up with technology. They will therefore have a harder time implementing technology into their life.

2.1.1 Consequences of being Sedentary Sedentary behaviour is associated with series of urgent threats to the health of young people. Approximately one-third of young people in the US suffer from overweight or obesity. Many serious health problems derive from obesity and create risks of cardiovascular diseases, strokes, asthma, and some cancers. Young people who live a daily life influenced by a sedentary behaviour have a greater fat mass than those with more physical activity. They also have higher BMI i.e. Body Mass Index, and a greater risk of being overweight or obese (Tremblay et al., 2011). Many studies with the focus on screen time and sedentary behaviour support the results and reveal evidence through a number of evaluations, which clearly show the association between BMI, fat mass, body weight and the increasing sedentary behaviour (Tremblay et al., 2011; Babey et al., 2013). Several other studies support the claim that sedentary behaviour can bring other health risks such as certain cancer types (Lynch, 2010) and mental diseases (Roshanaei-Moghaddam et al., 2009; Paluska & Schwenk, 2000).

2.1.2 Previous Studies and Interventions To get a better understanding of the problem and to get inspiration on how to solve it, it is beneficial to look at previous attempts made against sedentary behaviour. The following studies take a look at the problem of sedentary behaviour and possible ways of solving it. A study from 2007 (Slentz et al., 2007) investigated 260 US citizens who suffered fro m overweight. The study concluded that 30 minutes of moderate-intensive exercises on a daily basis is efficient for preventing further metabolic aggravation that is related to inactivity, especially in most overweight individuals with a high amount of sedentary activity. As a starting point, 30 minutes of daily activity seems very appropriate (Slentz et al., 2007). Regardless of a growth in physical activity, prolonged sedentary time still have a negative effect. Those who follow the WHO requirements (30 min physical activity per. day) can still be sedentary, which means that exercising is not enough. Decreasing sedentary time is crucial in order to maximise health benefits (Dantzig et al., 2013). Another study (Healy et al., 2008) has examined the effects of breaks in sedentary time and the benefits towards metabolic risks. The participants went through medical assessments

8


before and after testing. Accelerometers were placed on the test participants to measure physical activity, which they had to wear during all waking hours of their day for a week. The data from the study showed that having a break during sedentary time counteracts metabolic risks. The findings suggested that it is the manner of which the sedentary time was accumulated instead of just the overall time i.e. there is a difference between being sedentary for 4 hours in a row, compared to being sedentary for 4 hours, with breaks in between. This means that it can be beneficial to simply stand up during television advertisements. The study also shows that the use of accelerometers can be a useful way to monitor sedentary behaviour and develop a possible solution. Breaking the sedentary time is crucial for reducing possible health risks (Healy et al., 2008). This claim is supported by another study by Dantzig et al. (2013). Furthermore, the authors of Healy et al. (2008) say that frequent breaks of sedentary behaviour are associated with a healthier metabolism (Healy et al., 2008). In the report from Dantzig et al. (2013) they describe mobile applications as a solution that might be relevant for reducing sedentary behaviour, as mobile phones have many sensors than can be used accordingly. The application should be able to create sedentary awareness and reduce sedentary behaviour. Tremblay et al. (2011) agrees that a mobile application with the purpose of breaking the users sedentary time would be most beneficial and appropriate, but says there are some limitations when it comes to battery life, since they visualise an app that run in the background at all times. There are no clear guidelines for how these kind of breaks should look, but Owen et al. (2009) suggest that trying to minimise sedentary time with a 5 minute break every hour might be very beneficial. A study (Jans et al., 2007) about sedentary behaviour at workplaces, suggests that the breaks can in the form of small activities like e.g. stretching, retrieving office supplies or coffee, and still be able to counteract the health risks. From these studies we can derive that for breaks to work, people should have at least one 5-minute break per sedentary hour, that consists of e.g. standing, walking around or stretching. While it would be beneficial to do some more intense physical activity in the break, it is not needed for the break to have an effect.

9


2.1.3 Sub Conclusion Sedentary behaviour is an increasing problem that affects most individuals in the postmodern society. It has been deducted that a mobile application could be an effective tool to break sedentary behaviour, and also that accelerometer can be used to measure if a person is sedentary or not. Primarily two age groups stand out, but since a mobile application would be an effective tool, the technological advantages young people between 16-24 has, makes that age group especially relevant. Exercise is one way to deal with the problem, but those who exercise can still have a sedentary behaviour with the same health risks. A vast amount of studies suggests breaks during the sedentary time as an effective solution. From the analysis of the different intervention studies, it is clear that the possible guidelines for breaks in sedentary time would be at least 1 break of at least 5 minutes break per sedentary hour, that consists of e.g. standing, walking or stretching.

10


2.2 Target Group From the analysis of the problem, we know that the problem is most common in the age groups of 16 to 24 & 55 and above. Since the younger people are bigger consumers of technology and are digital natives, the younger age group was chosen to be the project’s target group.

2.2.1 Researching the target group The great use of technology amongst young people creates various possibilities in development of different technological devices. In 2014, 4.7 million out of 5.6 million Danish people had a smartphone (Statista, 2015). Figure 2.3 shows that 91% of Danish teens between 16 and 19 have downloaded a smartphone app. It also shows that the tendency is increasing. The numbers tell us that a solution on a smartphone application would suit the target group.

Figure 2.3 Statistics in percentages of the Danish population, showing how many downloaded apps in Denmark (Dansk Statistik, 2016).

Research questionnaire To research more about the target group, a questionnaire (Appendix 2) was prepared. The questionnaire was made to test, how much time the participants were sp ending on sedentary activities per day and in what category they see themselves regarding their use of technological devices. There was a couple of questions to confirm the data gathered when researching the problem area, which were not used when analysing the results.

Procedure and Sample Group Divided into two evaluation days, we went out to different gymnasiums to gather data fro m students within the age group of 16-19. All gymnasiums in Copenhagen were considered equally valid. Two gymnasiums were randomly selected through cluster sampling (Bjørner, 2015) in copenhagen; HTX Sukkertoppen and Tårnby Gymnasium.

11


Two evaluations were conducted. The first evaluation was at HTX Sukkertoppen, where 45 students were randomly selected during their lunch break. The second evaluation was conducted at Türnby Gymnasium with 16 participants also selected randomly through cluster sampling by the school (Bjørner, 2015). Here we got the opportunity to get the attention of an entire class during their school time.

Research Results The results from the sample groups (appendices 3 and 4) showed that 46% of the 61 tested participants spend 4 or more hours on sedentary activities in their spare time. The results (Figure 2.4) also revealed that 38% of the participants, who has a sedentary lifestyle, classified themselves as gamers.

Figure 2.4 Types of young people between 16-24 with a sedentary lifestyle.

12


2.2.2 Target Group Definition The research of the target group explicitly remarked that using smartphone apps amongst Danish teens is very popular. In addition, the test concluded that a great part of the Danish gymnasium students between the ages of 16 and 19, are leading a sedentary lifestyle. Our research shows that a big part of the participants are gamers and therefore a game could be a possible solution to the problem. By gathering these facts together a target group definition was created which is as follows: “Danish teens between 16-19 in gymnasiums who use smartphones and spend more than 4 hours of their daily spare time on sedentary activities�

13


2.3 Motivation A possible solution to the problem would have to motivate the people with a sedentary behaviour to take a break once per hour (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour). Motivation can be a great tool to make people want to act, who otherwise would not. This section gives an overview of the different kinds of motivation and discusses how it should be properly implemented into a smartphone application.

2.3.1 What is motivation? It is important to note that motivation is a huge psychological research area. There are hundreds of research papers on motivation and many different perspectives and definitions. This report primarily follows the research of Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. “A state that directs an organism in certain ways to seek particular goals.” (Cotman & McGaugh, 2014). While the above line is not the only definition, it does look at motivation from a very general perspective. Leading researchers and experts in motivation Ryan & Deci (2000), simply write: “Motivation produces”. According to Ryan & Deci (2000) there are two types of motivation: Intrinsic motivation, “which refers to doing an activity for the inherent satisfaction of the activity itself”, and extrinsic motivation which refers to “the performance of an activity in order to attain some separable outcome” .

2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation Intrinsic motivation is when one is self-determined to do an activity. Looking at the definition for intrinsic motivation, it is described as when an activity is done for the sole pleasure of the activity. Ryan & Deci (1985) explain what motivation is built of and how to facilitate intrinsic motivation in an environment. As stated in the target group section in this project, a smartphone application would be the environment. There are three key elements to achieve or enhance intrinsic motivation: Competence, autonomy and relatedness.

14


Competence is when one is capable of doing an action correctly. Everyone has a feeling of their own level of competence in an activity. Providing positive feedback for an individual enhances the individual’s feeling of self-competence (Ryan & Deci, 1985). A good feeling of selfcompetence for an activity can be enough to increase intrinsic motivation towards a specific activity. In connection to competence, Csikszentmihalyi (1975) suggests how an activity can make a person achieve the feeling of self-competence. He names it: Flow. “Flow is when opportunities for action are in balance with the actor’s skills.” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975). When skills, or competence in this case, are either greater or lesser than the opportunities for using them, it will result in the user feeling boredom or worry, which is obviously something a developer wants to avoid. In relation to a game it should be able to adjust the difficulty according to the skills of the user, so the user always finds himself experiencing flow. Autonomy is defined to be “the perceived origin or source of one’s own behaviour” (Ryan & Deci, 2002). It can be supported by “providing choice and minimizing the use of controls” (Ryan & Deci, 2002), whereas “controls” are meant to be forcing a certain behaviour or decision for the user. Autonomy is equally as important as competence. For example if an individual is provided with positive feedback (to enhance competence), but is forced to do the specific activity, it will not have the same enhancing effect on competence. Competence must go together with autonomy. While competence and autonomy are the two most crucial factors for increasing intrinsic motivation, people generally have a need for relatedness. Ryan & Deci (2000) suggests that for activities that are interpersonal, relatedness plays an important role in maintaining intrinsic motivation. Concluding on intrinsic motivation, in this project will be essential to support competence and autonomy together to increase the user’s motivation to take a break. Providing positive feedback whenever an activity is done will enhance the user’s feeling of self-competence, while choices and a minimum of external control will support the user’s autonomy. Relatedness is suggested to be important when intrinsic motivation is boosted by the enjoyment of relation with other people. It depends on the solution and target group whether the need for relatedness will really be there.

15


2.3.3 Extrinsic motivation Extrinsic motivation is the state, when a person does an activity only to reach a certain goal or reward (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In contrast to intrinsic motivation, the behaviour of one that is extrinsically motivated can vary in many different directions. The extrinsic motivation can turn into positive response behaviour like active personal commitment, or a negative response behaviour like unwillingness, amotivation or passive behaviour. People who exercise because they really want to achieve a certain body shape are extrinsically motivated, as are those who exercise to get in shape, because their fitness coach tells them to. Both examples concern more motivation for the outcome rather than the activity itself, therefore both are extrinsic motivation. What differs is that in the first case the extrinsic motivation is supported by a personal goal and feeling of choice (high level of autonomy), both are extrinsic motivation, but they vary in amount of autonomy. Figure 2.5 illustrates the different types of motivation and shows details of regulation types of extrinsic motivation. Leftmost, amotivation is when an individual lacks the intention to act, also referred to nonself-determined. On the far right, the optimal behaviour is intrinsic motivation when an individual is completely self-determined to act.

Figure 2.5 The Self-Determination Continuum, with Types of Motivation and Types of Regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2002)

In-between amotivation and intrinsic motivation are the different types of extrinsic motivation. External regulation is the least self-determined type of regulation within extrinsic motivation. External regulation is generally when one is solely motivated by rewards, demands or to avoid

16


punishment. As this form of motivation is very far from a self-determined behaviour, it does not have a positive effect on intrinsic motivation. Introjected regulation is described as a behaviour in which one feels motivated to show or prove a skill or capability to uphold self-worth. While the act itself is internally driven, the regulation has an external origin, leaving the individual with a low level of autonomy. Therefore this behaviour is still considered non-self-determined. Identified regulation is when the individual has identified a valuable goal or accepted the regulated behaviour as personally important. Ryan & Deci (2000) writes: “Identification represents an important aspect of the process of transforming external regulation into true selfregulation.” This means that identifying a goal, which the individual also sees value in, will initiate the feeling of autonomy and would be the first step of making an individual act self-determined. Integrated regulation shares qualities with intrinsic motivation, as this regulation occurs when an individual believes the activity is right to do, because of personal needs or values. This is still a form of extrinsic motivation as the activity is done to attain a separate outcome from the activity. Concluding on the extrinsic forms of motivation. The more integrative the better. The more autonomous the better. A smartphone application would require the user to identify, understand and believe that taking a break is the right thing to do. Whether they get a reward or not, it does not seem to affect the self-determination.

2.3.4 Comparing the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation Comparing people who are intrinsically motivated to those who are extrinsically motivated, in the majority of cases, intrinsically motivated people have more interest, excitement and confidence (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Facilitating competence and autonomy together with Csikszentmihalyi’s (1975) flow theory might result in a sufficiently challenged and confident user. It has been demonstrated that extrinsic rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation. According to Ryan & Deci (2000) “tangible rewards but also threats, deadlines, directives, pressured evaluations, and imposed goals diminish intrinsic motivation.” Note that this is only true when the individual is intrinsically motivated where the behaviour is fully self-determined. An intrinsically motivated person will then focus on the reward instead of the activity, making the motive or reason for doing the activity extrinsic.

17


The effects of extrinsic motivations such as tangible rewards or imposed goals, e.g. “Your goal is to run three miles today”, can result in decreasing the very important intrinsic motivation because the focus can change to the external reward instead of the fun activity. On the other side, choice, acknowledgement of feelings, and opportunities for self-direction allow people to get a greater feeling of autonomy, thus an increase in intrinsic motivation.

2.3.5 Sub Conclusion Motivation makes people act. Intrinsic motivation is the optimal form of motivation as it has seen the best production results. In this case the target group is definitely not intrinsically motivated to take breaks. It will be a goal for this project to make the activity of a break “fun” or more interesting, to the point that the user actually feels intrinsically motivated to take a break. We know that autonomy and competence are essential for self-regulation. Facilitating options and choices rather than demanding a behaviour is the key to increase the user’s competence and autonomy and therefore intrinsic motivation. Creating opportunities balanced to the user’s skills and providing positive feedback on actions to enhance the feeling of selfcompetence, will equally increase the user’s intrinsic motivation if autonomy is presented as well. Extrinsic motivation should be used carefully by identifying a goal or purpose, and integrating the user by offering choices and opportunities for self-direction. Because a big part of the target group plays games it would make sense to create one which would intrinsically motivate them. Combined with the extrinsic motivation, specifically the identified regulation, the user can identify with the problem and make a goal to deal with.

18


2.4 Game Theories Since many from our target group define themselves as gamers (2.2.1 Researching the target group) a game could be a solution to the problem (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour). Additionally games can intrinsically motivate the user and therefore be an effe ctive way of making the users take the breaks (2.3 Motivation). According to Salen & Zimmerman (2004) “a game is a system, in which players engage in an artificial conflict, defined by rules that result in a quantifiable outcome”. While those criteria are just the basics of every game, it does not mean that it necessarily motivates the users to play the game. Games use many game elements for motivating the player to play. They can use extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to create a flow experience (2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation).

2.4.1 Game Elements When motivating a player to play a game, the game elements are used to create intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Therefore, Kapp (2012) provides us with major elements that can motivate users to play and be more engaged in a game: 

Leaderboards, badges, points and rewards - Elements, which push people to perfor m better. It is that competitive element which gives people the desire to be at the top of the leaderboard or receive a unique reward, which no one else has. Those factors make a user play and play again to improve their score.

Feedback - When the player knows where they are in the process of e.g. levelling up or learning a topic, they are more motivated as the progress is seen in real time.

Levels - Going through parts of a game makes the player feel that they are progressing. The level of a character, different levels of difficulty or gaining experience are the elements, which provide feedback about how the player is doing.

Failure - It makes the player feel more pleasure and satisfaction when they overcome difficult obstacles to achieve a desired goal.

Storytelling - A story behind games are implemented on a daily basis nowadays. It makes the player more involved in the universe of the game and understand the context better.

The aforementioned elements could be used to motivate the player to take their break fro m sedentary activities. The possibility of failure could be used to add a degree of difficulty, to accommodate the rising skill level of the users and keep them in flow (2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation).

19


By showing progression, involving the story and providing feedback the users might willingly take a break just because of the impact those elements might have on them. These game elements have great potential for becoming a solution to the problem.

20


2.5 SOTA The findings through the analysis indicate the importance of breaks in the sedentary time (2.1 Sedentary behaviour). The problematics are relatively new and in 2013 Dantzig et al. (2013) completed a study with the purpose of breaking sedentary behaviour. The study examined the importance of breaks and how to implement them in the daily work life of an office. The implementation was done through an app called SitCoach. SitCoach measured user movement through the accelerometer in smartphones and reminded the user to take a break once in awhile. The reminders were created by persuasive text messages suggesting that the participants should take a break. The results showed that timely messages could be an effective tool to reduce screen time and therefore sedentary time. Stipulating timely reminders for the users might be an ample choice to establish sedentary awareness and leading to a change in behaviour. The study provides recommendations for an improved application that aims toward breaking the sedentary time. SitCoach has by default set breaks to 5 minutes once per hour. This supports our definition of breaks (2.1 Sedentary behaviour). It is also crucial to make them as discrete and unobtrusive as possible. The user should be able to postpone or disable the warnings in certain situations, where they might be disruptive in a problematic way. Additionally a possible application should respect the user’s autonomy and give them control over their behaviour (2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation). The study also concludes that improvements for an application should support the users in controlling their sedentary behaviour. The accelerometer can be an effective tool to monitor sedentary time and provide an organised result that can help the users optimise their breaking time.

2.5.1 Sub Conclusion The study on SitCoach revealed that the awareness of the possible health issues associated with sedentary behaviour is generally low. Creating awareness amongst the users is likely to be more successful if the adverse health effects are clear to them. Additionally a solution could be to provide the users with knowledge about their own sitting time and then give the m different opportunities on how to reduce it. SitCoach only uses extrinsic motivation by focusing on the outcome. We want to create a more entertaining experience by increasing the intrinsic motivation.

21


2.6 Sensors in Smartphones Breaking sedentary behaviour would require the user to stand up while playing the game (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour). The target group are great consumers of smartphones, which makes it an appropriate platform to create a game for (2.2.1 Researching the target group). Smartphones provide many possibilities, especially with the large amount of implemented sensors.

2.6.1 Smartphone sensors “A sensor is a converter that measures physical quantities and converts it into a signal which can be read by an observer or by an instrument.� (Halliday, 2016) There is great potential in using sensors to gather data about the user’s activities, and similarly in using sensors to measure certain conditions that apply to them. Rather than manually inserting information about activity or other conditions, sensors ca n provide accurate data without demanding much from the users. Figure 2.6 shows a list of sensors that are available in an Android smartphone (Developer.Android, 2016).

22


What sensors exist in Smartphones

Figure 2.6 List of available sensors in an Android smartphone (Developer.Android, 2016).

Relevant Sensors In figure 2.6 many sensors are presented, but not all seems relevant in regards to the purpose of this project. In order for a smartphone to get the users to stand up and move around, certain sensors are more appropriate than others. The following present possible sensors that could be part of the solution.

23


Accelerometer complemented with a Gyroscope sensor Combining an accelerometer and a gyroscope is a way of measuring the user’s activity and movement. With an accelerometer as the main sensor and a Gyroscope as the secondary, authors have reported an increase in activity recognition by 3.1-13.4% (Shoaib et al., 2013). However this combination has also been criticised. Additionally Shoaib et al. (2013) reported that adding a Gyroscope to an Accelerometer might not increase recognition accuracy. This combination could be a tool for gathering data about how much the users are sedentary in order for the application to create sedentary awareness (2.5 SOTA). This can be accomplished by notifying the users when they have been sitting for an hour, making them aware that they need to take a break.

Camera sensor A study from Liu (2013) examines the camera sensor in a smartphone. The study shows that the camera sensor can be a tool for recognising specific surroundings. Light or colour in a place can be used to convey a specific signature in photos that can be sensed by the camera. Sensing surroundings could be a way of making the users move around forcing them to scan objects or recognise different locations with the camera.

2.6.2 Sub Conclusion The project aims towards creating an app that helps sedentary people break their sedentary behaviour. For this particular purpose there are a few sensors that have been looked into that could help in dealing with the problem. The accelerometer measures acceleration of the smartphone, which could be useful towards measuring what the user is doing. Using the Gyroscope could be used as a tool that

helps in making sure the user is being physically active. Being able to know what the users are doing helps figuring out whether or not the user is being sedentary, and if not, how much physical work they actually are doing. Lastly the camera sensor is a tool that might be able to make the user move while taking a break, by forcing them to scan specific areas.

24


2.7 Augmented Reality A relatively new technology called augmented reality uses the camera sensor for recognising patterns or locations while simultaneously adding digital content for various purposes (Craig, 2013). In the book Understanding Augmented Reality the definition is: “Augmented reality is a medium in which digital information is overlaid on the physical world that is in both spatial and temporal registration with the physical world and that is interactive in real time� (Craig, 2013).

What this means is that augmented reality is digital elements projected on top of the real world. These elements appears to be part of the real world by transforming in real time and moving relative to a state of the real world, containing the position and orientation of a specific recognisable area.

2.7.1 How it works Augmented reality works by having a combination of hardware and software register and processing a camera input, which contains information about a real environment. Through a display, it projects digital content onto the camera input in real time. For this process to work, information about the state of the real environment is required. The most common solution to finding the state of the real world is by having an object with easily recognisable axes, rotation and scale, to know where to project the digital content. Some softwares also use point recognition to calculate the aforementioned information. The most common solution is pictures made for this specific purpose called fiducial markers. Another solution is having software recognise patterns in the real world like faces, brick walls or posters (Craig, A. B. 2013).

2.7.2 Sub Conclusion Augmented reality has the potential of obliging the user to move around. If an app uses augmented reality and the fiducial markers are placed in several places the user of the app has to stand up and move around between them. If used with the theory from motivation (2.3 Motivation) and the game elements (2.4 Game Theory), Augmented reality might be the solution to influence the user to ha ve breaks (2.1.2 Previous Studies and Interventions) while being intrinsically motivated.

25


2.8 UX for mobile devices 2.8.1 User Experience When making a mobile application, it is important to conceptualise and design towards a good experience for the users. If the users have a good experience with the application they are more likely to use the product again. However, if the user experience is bad the users will abandon the application (Garrett, 2010a). To design for a good user experience, we need knowledge about what user experience is and how to design with that in mind. “UX is a consequence of a user’s internal state (predispositions, expectations, needs, motivation, mood, etc.), the characteristics of the designed system (e.g. complexity, purpose, usability, functionality, etc.) and the context (or the environment) within which the interaction occurs (e.g. organisational/social setting, meaningfulness of the activity, voluntariness of use, etc.)” (Hassenzahl & Tractinsky, 2006). The citation above describes user experience as a psychological reaction to design. As introduced before, by having a good experience the user feels more engaged in frequent use of the product and content associated with the activity.

2.8.2 The Layer Process Model According to Garrett (2010a) a good user experience can be achieved by doing five important steps during the design process, Garrett shows a model (Figure 2.7) that visually expresses the connection between the different layers. The first steps are more abstract subjects, whereas the last steps are more concrete. The first step defines a strategy, which consists of the user’s needs and the purpose of the design. The next step is making a detailed scope, which can be made in a form of describing a list of all the functions and features required to satisfy the needs defined in the strategy. After making a scope comes the planning of the structure, which describes the interaction possibilities and information architecture of the design. When the structure is done, it is used to design the skeleton containing the positioning and composition of all the content and elements. The last step is about the surface, which contains the visual appearance of the design.

26


The model begins with defining requirements, goes through designing and ends on producing visuals. It could be used as a base for designing the prototype to get around every aspect of the design process. If the project is executed with an iterative approach the model should be run through several times to refine the outcome. In case of natural progression as an approach, each layer is worked in depth to result in a prototype.

Figure 2.7 Garrett (2010b) 5 steps for good user experience

2.8.3 Seven Stages of action When designing an interface it is important to have the user’s intentions in mind and based on that, give them the options they need to reach their intentions. Three main problems have to be considered in order to make a design that allows the users to get what they expect. First is the mapping, where the options and their functions have to be clear and communicate their purpose without failing, in order to fulfil the user’s intentions.

27


Second is the ease of use, where the complexity of how the different options inflict the final outcome together. Third is the feedback from using the options given, the outcome from changing the variables (Norman, 1986). Vukovic (2014) created the 7 Laws of User Interface Design similar to Norman’s 7 stages of action (1986). The laws are used to make sure that the user of a product gets the best interface experience.

2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design The application needs the provide the user with a good experience. The design of our application is built upon the 7 Laws of User Interface Design authored by Vukovic (2014). He has over 10 years of experience in a worldwide advertising agency, working as designer and creative director.

1. Law of clarity People avoid and often ignore things they cannot understand. Avoid designing interface elements that make people wonder what they do, because no one will bother figuring it out. 2. Law of preferred action The users feel more comfortable when they understand what the preferred action is. Users should never wonder what to do next — the preferred action should be obvious. 3. Law of context The users expect to see interface controls close to the objects they want to control. Keep things handy for the users — if something can be edited, changed or otherwise controlled, the controls should be placed right next to it. 4. Law of defaults The user will rarely change default settings. Defaults are powerful, for instance most people have a default background and ringtone on their phones. We do not notice defaults, but they rule our world. Make sure all default values are as useful and practical as possible — it is safe to assume some people will never change them. 5. Law of guided action The users will probably do something if they are asked to. There is a big difference between expecting users to do something on their own and asking them specifically to do it. If you want users to do something, ask them without hesitation.

28


6. Law of feedback The users will feel more confident if you provide clear and constant feedback. Feedback makes the users feel in control and makes them confident to use the product again. 7. Law of Easing The users will be more inclined to perform a complex action if it is broken down into smaller steps. People will rather complete 10 small tasks than one giant task. Small tasks are not intimidating and give a sense of accomplishment once they are completed.

2.8.5 Sub Conclusion To conclude, user experience can be defined in three steps. First is the initial intentions of the user when presented to a system. Second is the options given to change the state of the system. Last is the satisfaction the users have when the option used has influenced the system. To meet the three steps when designing, it is important to be aware of the users and developers needs. The model by Garrett and the 7 Laws of User Interface Design, is good to have in mind when creating a design.

29


2.9 Analysis Conclusion Sedentary behaviour is a problem seen amongst the majority of the Danish society (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour). Inactivity related to sedentary behaviour creates serious health risks and therefore seems important to deal with. Breaking sedentary time is crucial for improving upon possible health risks and a mobile application seems to be a promising solution towards the problem. According to this study, the young age group between 16 and 24 are one of the most exposed age groups. The target group of this project is narrowed down to teens within the age of 16-19 year olds because of their great consumption of technology (2.2 Target Group). Motivating the target group to take the necessary breaks is essential and the research of motivation showed the efficiency of intrinsic motivation (2.3 Motivation). However extrinsic motivation should also be used carefully, without undermining the intrinsic motivation. The study examined games and theories behind them (2.4 Game Theories). Games can be a way of creating intrinsic motivation amongst the users and might be beneficial when breaking their sedentary time. Additionally research of the target group also showed that a big part of the test participants considered themselves as gamers (2.2 Target Group). Reminding users that it is time to take a break, requires the smartphone to measure the user’s activity (2.5 SOT A). The best way to measure whether users are sedentary or not, is through the accelerometer (2.6 Sensors). To actually make the users stand and move aroun d during the break, augmented reality seems to be a good choice (2.7 Augmented Reality). Combining augmented reality with a game should be beneficial towards motivating the users intrinsically to take the necessary breaks. A previous study (2.5 SOT A) attempted to reduce sedentary behaviour through breaks. The researchers ended the study with inspirational elements and improvements for a similar application, which can be used as inspiration for the prototype of this project. Lastly the application should give the users a good user experience. Research showed that the 5 layer process model by Garrett (2.8.2 The Layer Process Model) can be beneficial when designing it. Additionally the 7 Laws of User Interface Design, are good to follow when creating a user interface design. These two will be a part of the design process when designing the prototype.

30


3. FPS & Req Spec 3.1 Final Problem Statement “How can teens in the age of 16-19 with a sedentary behaviour, be intrinsically motivated during an active break through a mobile game?”

3.2 Requirement Specification The requirements for this project are as follows: 

Should contain a game.

Should motivate the user with game elements.

Functions should be clearly visible to the user and give the expected feedback/output.

Should be a mobile application.

Needs to implement at least one 5 min active break every hour of sedentary behaviour.

Make use of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Utilising one or more relevant mobile sensors (Camera, accelerometer).

31


4. Methods This prototype was developed using an iterative design approach. The design process consisted of three iterations, where each iteration was a process of establishing requirements, design alternatives, prototyping and evaluating. This process is illustrated in figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1 Interaction design lifecycle model.

Following this method each evaluation provided feedback on the current prototype and allowed to establish new requirements. Using them, a new design was made and implemented into a new prototype, which went through a new evaluation.

This project ran through three design cycle iterations before the final evaluation. 1. Low-fidelity prototype evaluation with a usability focus. 2. High-fidelity prototype evaluation with a usability & user experience focus. 3. Final prototype evaluation with answering the Final Problem Statement as focus. Each of the iterations followed the Garretts 5 layer model (2.8.2 The Layer Process Model) It was chosen that the prototype should be designed in iterations as it had many advantages (Preece et al., 2015). It allowed reliable user feedback from usability tests, which would improve the prototype systematically. More management attention might be required in regards to documenting the iterations and the phases within. This method is usually better suited for larger and more specific problem based projects.

32


Before beginning the design, a strategy was needed for answering the final proble m statement. With the final problem statement: “How can teens in the age of 16-19 with a sedentary behaviour, be intrinsically motivated during an active break through a mobile game?“, this project tests if the target group is motivated to play the game. It can be measured with a valid device, which used in many of Ryan & Deci’s studies and several other experiments related to intrinsic motivation.

IMI which is short for Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (Self Determination Theory, 2016) is described as “...a multidimensional measurement device intended to assess participants’ subjective experience. It has been used in several experiments related to intrinsic motivation.”

The instrument assesses the participants: 

Interest/Enjoyment: Subscale that is considered as the specific way to measure intrinsic motivation.

Perceived competence/Perceived choice: The perceived choice and perceived competence are theorised to boost intrinsic motivation, which is why these should be considered.

Effort / Importance: Is considered relevant for this project, as the results will show whether the participants were affected by the motivation.

Pressure / Tension: Although the measurement device is called Intrinsic Motivation Inventory, it is only the Pressure / Tension that is theorised to be a negative predictor of intrinsic motivation, but in this project Time Pressure is used to make the game more challenging. Therefore it is seen as being relevant for this project, but with a different perspective than Ryan & Deci had.

Value/Usefulness: Value/Usefulness is considered relevant for this project as the results will show whether the participants can see themselves use the game again.

33




Relatedness: Relatedness is not considered relevant for this project, as the participants do not interfere with other people while playing the game.

An interview would allow us to learn more about why and which motivation factors went well and which did not live up to the expectations. A semi-structured interview would be conducted with questions related to the intrinsic motivation in the prototype. To get even more insight on a specific topic unstructured follow-up questions should provide more in-depth answers.

Combining the above quantitative data with qualitative data from interviews and observations, we should have a good amount of data to answer the final problem statement.

34


5. 1st Iteration 5.1 Strategy

Through the analysis, the design requirements, which are the first layer of the model, were already established. In this project the strategy step of this model was skipped and the design requirements from the analysis were used instead. The first iteration of the design is where the foundation of the prototype was produced. Here the concept of the whole application and story of the game are described. Furthermore it touches upon the user experience model (2.8.2 The Layer Process Model), which is used to create the function list, the structure of the app and placement of UI elements.

5.1.1 App Concept By measuring user movement through an accelerometer, the users will be notified once per sedentary hour to take a 5-minute break (2.6.1 Smartphone sensors; 2.1.2 Previous Studies and Interventions). When the notification appears and the users press it, the app will open and fro m there they can play the game. During the break the users are required to move around and use the smartphone camera to scan pictures on the walls and reveal the AR content connected to the game's storyline. A storyline will be designed to intrinsically motivate by involving the users in it (2.4.1 Game Elements). The story will expand when the users scan different pictures to explore new crime evidence.

35


5.1.2 Story Concept The main theme of the story is crime investigation. The user will play the role of a detective. When the first level starts the police inspector will introduce the case to the users. To solve it, the users have to go to three different predetermined pictures that were previously hung on the walls in his room (Appendix 5). After looking at all the scenes the users have to go to a police line up with all the suspects and press on the one they think is the perpetrator. If the user is correct the inspector congratulates the user and ends the game. If the user is wrong, they will have to try again on the next break.

5.2 Scope The scope is a list of functions based on user needs and technical requirements. The list contains functions that the design needs to contain in order to meet the requirements.

Figure 5.1 User needs and functions. *Star marked functions were not implemented

The above functions are planned to be implemented throughout the iterations. Breaks require 4 functions (Figure 5.1). These functions are necessary to make the notifications as unobtrusive as possible (2.5 SOTA). The user must be able to cancel or snooze the notifications to make sure that their autonomy is not undermined (2.5 SOTA; 2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation). Furthermore the users should be able to turn the notification off or on at specific times. Lastly the users should be able to fill their schedule both for conserving battery life and make the application as flexible as possible. The application also provide accomplishment messages that will give the users

36


confidence and make them able to see when they are doing the right thing (2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation; 2.4.1 Game Elements). Additionally the users should be able to follow how they are doing regarding their health improvements. This can motivate the users when they feel the progress (2.4.1 Game Elements). The game included in the application should use the game elements seen in figure 5.1, different levels, a good narrative, showing progress and using time pressure to create a god and fun experience for the users (2.4.1 Game Elements). The application should also include information about sedentary behaviour which can create awareness amongst the users, that might be beneficial (2.5 SOTA).

5.3 Structure

The structure is the core navigational system for the app. It has been done to design the user interaction with the prototype.

37


Figure 5.2 Interaction map for the app.

Figure 5.2 displays an interaction diagram that creates an overview of the full application. When the user opens the application for the first time, an introduction screen will appear. This screen will, in short, introduce the user to how the app and game works and to the proble m area related to sedentary behaviour. The SitCoach project (2.5 SOT A) presented different recommendations for improvements of a future application with the same purpose. One of them was establishing awareness of the health problems associated with sedentary behaviour. It was also seen as an important part of extrinsic motivation when the user identifies a valuable goal and accepts to change behaviour as it becomes a personal importance (2.3.3 Extrinsic Motivation). To fulfill the requirement the app will try to create the aforementioned awareness. Additionally this screen will also create a purpose that can increase the user’s extrinsic motivation (2.3 Motivation)

38


After the introduction the setup screen will appear. The purpose of the setup screen is to provide the user with options and make the application as flexible and convenient as possible. The setup screen has 2 options; a day planner and a break setup option. Firstly the day planner will require the users to define when they have spare time every day in the week, making the application more efficient. The application has to run at all times in their spare time, so the accelerometer will be able to measure if the users are moving. There will be two setting schedule options: 

To set a default time for all weekdays,

To plan days yourself. When it comes to the break there will be a default option that recommends the users to

take a 5-minute break every sedentary hour (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour), but they should be able to define their breaks differently at their own will.

After the setup or when the application is opened for the second time, the users are brought directly to the menu screen. Here the users have 4 different options to choose from; Play, Setup, Stats and Read More: 

Stats: Will provide progress feedback (2.3 Motivation) through a statistical overview, displaying a graph that tracks the user’s break performance.

Setup: Through this the users will always be able to change their break and schedule setting in a way that is convenient to them. (2.5 SOTA).

Read More: This will lead the users to a screen where they can read more about sedentary behaviour. To give the users a choice and to not overwhelm them, this information is presented in th e read more screen so they can choose to read it if they wish.

Play: Takes the users to the level select screen. If the users have been sedentary for, by default, an hour a notification will pop up on the

phone. When the notification is pressed it will, just as the play button in the main menu, lead the user to the level select screen.

39


From the level select screen the users will be able to choose which level they want to play. The whole point of the game is to keep the users entertained during their break, in a way that motivates them to take it. When a level has been chosen there will be a short intro to the story. After the intro, the game timer starts. The users have to go to different pictures and scan them with the phone. When a 3D model shows up the users will be able to look around it and find clues to solve the case. When the users know who committed the crime, they can go to the last picture on which they are presented with 3 characters to choose from. Whether the users choose the correct or incorrect perpetrator, there will be a story outro and a message saying that the break is over, which provides the users with feedback about how they did (2.3.2 Intrinsic Motivation).

5.4 Skeleton After a structure of the app was made, a sketch of the overall layout for the app was created. Making and testing a low fidelity prototype allowed to find issues with the design and to see which screens were necessary to implement. It also made it easier to make an evaluation that answered the final problem statement. The overall layout means all the elements and content throughout the app, including buttons, pictures and text fields. The skeleton was used to ensure that all the components were placed correctly, according to the navigation of the app and to make sure that there was consistency throughout the app. The app and the game have different skeletons as they have separate interactions.

5.4.1 The App skeleton The app will contain: 

an Introduction Screen.

a Setup Screen.

a Main Menu.

a Stats Screen.

40


Figure 5.3 Initial design sketch for the introduction screens.

Figure 5.4 Initial design sketch of the setup screen

The introduction was made of several pictures with the same layout as shown in figure 5.3. The users are able to swipe between 3 screens. When the users reach the last screen, they can press a button to enter the setup menu.

The setup screen consists of several tabs. The first is shown in figure 5.4 where the users can see their weekly schedule. From there they can click on the top button to change the schedule. There is also a button, which gives the users an opportunity to change how often they want a break. To save the settings and go back, the users are provided with an arrow button in the top left corner.

41


Figure 5.5 Initial design sketch of the main menu screen.

Figure 5.6 Initial sketch of the stats screen.

The main menu has as seen in figure 5.5, four buttons to further advance in the app: 

Play The users go into the level select screen of the game.

Setup The users go to the setup menu, where they can change their weekly schedule.

Stats The users go to the stats screen, where they can see their progress in the game, breaks taken, break streak and overall breaks upheld over time periods.

Read more The users go to the read more screen, where they can read more about sedentary behaviour. The stats screen (Figure 5.6) is made up of the users’ performance recorded with the

accelerometer that is put into graphs in order to give the users a better overview of how well they are doing. The users will be able to change between daily, weekly and monthly graphs in order to provide better feedback and give the them an overview of their performance.

42


Figure 5.7 The initial design for the read more screen.

Figure 5.8 Initial design for the level select

The read more screen (Figure 5.7) is made as a mean to read more about sedentary behaviour and the consequences connected to it. It will consist of information and a scroll function.

5.4.2 The Game skeleton The game consists of: 

A Notification

Level Select Screen

Story Screen

Camera Screen

Question and Answer Screen

Story End Screen

Break End Screen The Notification will be a simple message saying that the users need to take a break. When

they click the message, they will be taken to the level select screen.

The game can be accessed through the notification message and also through the main menu, which takes the player directly to the level selection. As seen in figure 5.8 the level selection consists of levels on a horizontal line. Users can swipe to get to the later levels. There is also a

43


back button, which takes the users back to the Main Menu. Each level is displayed with an image and information showing what level it is.

When the users select the level, a character will show up and start narrating the crime investigation. It is explained by having an image of a character with a text field beside him. After the short story intro, the users get to search for clues by scanning the pictures.

5.5 Surface

The surface of the app is the visual appearance of its UI. (2.8.2 The Layer Process Model) In the first iteration the Surface was not the main focus as the conducted evaluation was all about creating a good skeleton on which the prototype’s layout could be based.

5.5.1 Theme The Visual appearance of the screens were drawn with a pencil and kept in the theme of a library. The main menu buttons were designed for the theme and looked like books, the introduction screen had a frame of a painting, read more and stats screen had information written on the books pages. The design of the surface was limited to just creating drawings which were later implemented in the POP app.

5.5.2 Implementation

44


For the first implementation, a low fidelity prototype was made in an app called POP. The prototype of the app was hand drawn and the POP app then used pictures of those drawings to simulate a real app.

POP takes app sketches and lets the developers link them to each other through link areas they define. The buttons can be controlled by a simple touch or gesture, giving a good simulation of a working app with buttons and swipe functions (Figure 5.9). An initial design of the app was made after testing the usability of the chosen user interface.

Figure 5.9 Implementation of the first prototype

Using POP to illustrate the prototype of the user interface ideas made it much easier to see how the app would look when put together. After trying to navigate through the app, it became easy to notice flaws, which led to planning the low fidelity prototype evaluation.

45


5.6 Evaluation

The evaluation of the first iteration was a usability test that focused on the placements of U I elements in the prototype.

5.6.1 Theory To get quick and easy feedback on the navigation and layout in the app a “ quick and dirty” usability test was conducted in the early design stages. The advantage of this evaluation method is to easily gain relevant and quick knowledge about functionality from certain areas of a product.

The evaluation followed an unstructured test procedure, with given tasks of relevant scenarios that would fit normal situations, which the users might be in while using the app. The advantage of making tasks that could fit real life situations is that we can gain more realistic and natural answers.

The data gathering focused on qualitative data. The data was collected through interviews and observations. The interview was unstructured and loosely conducted in order for the participant to have a free conversation and get as many aspects enlightened as possible. After each task the participants were asked a question from the interview to gain a spontaneous answer about how they felt about how they just performed (Bjørner, 2015).

46


The observation focused on errors and problematics from the design and layout of the lowfi prototype. The observer performed a direct observation to see the participant’s actual reactions while using the different screens. Additionally the observation was a non-participant observation, because the researchers were not interrupting participants while being tested (Bjørner, 2015). Throughout the test the participants were asked to think out loud. The participant could then create a flow of thoughts that would make them more aware of certain aspects they could otherwise have missed, but also provide more data for the observer to note down. The sampling group was found through random convenience sampling at the AAU Campus (Bjørner, 2015).

5.6.2 Low Fidelity Prototype Usability Test The test was done in a controlled environment using hand-drawn screens (Appendix 22), which were implemented in the POP app. This allowed to test whether the Seven Laws of User Interface Design (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design) had the intended effects on every screen.

The test was carried out on 10 test participants who were all Medialogy students on the 2nd semester. The test-participants went through five tasks (Appendix 6), where they had to navigate through the app by pressing buttons or swiping. During each task, a test assistant noted qualitative data about errors and problematics. When a task was completed, the participants were interviewed about how they felt about the task and if they felt any confusion or annoying moments, they were asked why.

5.6.3 Results The results from the test showed where the design had errors and problems. The results are presented here followed by a discussion further below.

1) Navigating through Intro Screens (Figure 5.3) 6/10 of the participants felt confused and lost. a) For 6/10 of the participants, swiping through the intro screens was not an intuitive action. They tried to press the navigation circles, which were intended to guide the users to swipe to the next page. b) 2. Change Spare Time Schedule:

c) An issue was identified on the Setup Screen (Figure 5.4) where 4/10 of the participants tried to click on the days, which were not intended to be interacted with.

47


d) When the participants had set the new schedule for a particular day (Appendix 7) and had to save it, 4/10 of the participants did not click the save button. They felt it was unclear whether they were supposed to press the “Save” button or the “Back” button, as the two functions were quite similar. 2) Level selection screen.

a) 7/10 of the participants swiped naturally, because of the horizontal line the levels were placed on. The other 3/10 needed to look at a swipe indicator before they knew how to navigate.

48


6. 2nd Iteration 6.1 Discussion and new requirements

The following section is a discussion based on the results from the Evaluation of Iteration 1.

The underneath bullet point 1a refers to the issue described in the above bullet point 1a from the results of the 1st iteration (5.6.3 Results). The same goes for 1a, 2a, 2b,3a.

1) Navigating through Intro Screens a) This was identified as a lack of the law of clarity (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design), as the users did not have a feeling of where they were in the app. A possible solution could be a bar, which would indicate the steps that the users have to take to reach the main menu. The current step should be highlighted. b) This was identified as a lack of the law of preferred action (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design). There should be no doubt that the users have to swipe. A swipe indicator should be added here. 2) Change Spare Time Schedule a) The buttons on this screen should be more clear (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design) and stand out more. The users should have no problem knowing which elements to interact with.

49


b) Here we identified a lack of guided action (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design). The app should guide the user to save the new setup, rather than equally proposing a choice between the back button and the save button. Following the law of context (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design) the save button should be moved to just below the alarm edit, as the users expects the save button to be close to editable objects. 3) Level Selection Screen a) Just as in issue 1b, there should be no doubt that the users have to swipe. To eliminate doubt about the preferred action (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design) a swipe indicator should also be added here. Concluding on the First Evaluation a set of issues will be re-designed and implemented in the highfidelity prototype:

Swipe indicators for the Intro Screens and Level Selection Screen.

A bar with the steps, where the current step is highlighted on Intro Screens.

Clarified buttons on the Setup Overview Screen.

Save button should be just below the alarm edit, on the Spare Time Schedule Setup Screen.

6.2 Design

50


The second iteration of the design reflects upon the evaluation of the 1st iteration and uses its results as the foundation for the UI elements design and the surface. To give the users influence on the design of the app they took part in a participatory test and provided ideas for the visual appearance.

6.3 Surface In the second iteration, surface became a focus point. At this point we picked a main theme and started making decisions as to how the visual appearance should look (2.8.2 The Layer Process Model).

6.3.1 Theme The chosen theme of the prototype was crime investigations. Figure 6.1 is a picture that was used for inspiration for the design and was used when designing the UI elements for the app.

Figure 6.1 The inspirational picture.

6.3.2 Flat Design According to Pratas (2014) flat design is characterised as “having a minimalistic look, focusing on removing all extra elements and effects from a design such as bevel, shadows, lighting effects,

51


depth, texture, and every element that creates and gives an extra dimension to the these elements�

The end result when using flat design is a clean and simple look when comparing to skeuomorphism, which is the opposite approach that tries to realistically imitate its physical counterpart (Pratas 2014). The inspirational picture from figure 6.1, was used as a reference for the style in the prototype.

6.3.3 Colour scheme The colour scheme of the app consists of different shades of brown, going from a very light sand colour to a very dark brown. The blue was added as an eyecatcher.

Figure 6.2 The colour scheme used for the design.

All the brown colours in figure 6.2 are different saturations of the same brown hue. Whereas the blue used in the colour scheme is a complimentary colour to the lightest of the shades of brown.

6.4 Participatory design Since this project is taking a user centered approach the users opinions were taken into account by using a participatory design method.

6.4.1 What is participatory design Participatory design is a research. Although sometimes it has been seen as a design approach characterised by user involvement (Johnson, 1998). Since participatory design is still developing, it tends to be very flexible in its approach, however three basic stages are almost always present (Spinuzzi, 2005): 1. Initial exploration work 

At this stage the designer observes the users and gets to know how they work together, use technologies, their workflow, their routines and other aspects.

52


2. Discovery process 

At this stage the requirements for the prototype are established. The designers and users in cooperation can clarify the user’s goals and values.

3. Prototyping 

This stage is where the prototype is created. It can be done by doing mockups and colleagues, paper prototypes or cooperative prototyping and similar methods.

Even when these 3 steps are all present, it is not guaranteed that the participatory design will be a success. According to Schuler & Namioka (1993), for a participatory design to be a success it is important that: 1. It actually makes a difference for those who participate. 2. It is likely that what they contributed with is going to be implemented. 3. It is fun for the user.

6.4.2 Objectives and Execution The participatory design for this prototype was used as a design approach with the goal to gather design ideas from the participants. It was performed having Schuler & Namioka’s three steps guide in mind to create a successful participatory design.

6.4.3 Results and discussion The participatory design ended up giving the prototype 4 different visual design ideas. The first design was a simple text (Appendix 9) with no real theme. The only screen that had icons, was the main menu. The second design was a medieval theme (Appendix 10) with gears and the other one was simple icons describing what each button does. Neither of those matched the overall game idea very well. The third design idea was a medal / festival theme (Appendix 11), which had ni ce looking visuals and fit well with the prototype since the game was supposed to have rewards when the user did well, however it did not fit the detective theme. The last result was a real detective theme (Appendix 12) with case files and reports as U I elements. It fit perfectly to the theme of the app. Out of all 4 different designs ideas we chose to implement the detective one since it fitted well with the crime story in the app.

53


6.5 Implementation

The new design and knowledge gained from the low-fidelity prototype, created a good foundation for the implementation of the high-fidelity prototype. After testing the navigation and layout, it was clear how different elements should be placed to be user friendly. The new and improved skeleton for the application made it easier to implement usable functions and to keep an overview of the elements in each screen. This section describes the high-fidelity prototype and how it was implemented.

6.5.1 High-fidelity prototype The prototype was built for smartphones with Android OS having only the most important features working. The focus of the functions are based on the research question (3.10.1 Final Proble m Statement), which means that the game is the first priority of this prototype. For testing purposes, only the introduction screen, menu, read more, level select and the game were implemented.

6.5.2 Visual Production The production of the visuals were inspired by the detective theme (Appendix 12) of the participatory design session. The idea was to create a surface that would look like the home of a detective. It was important that the users would have no doubt that the app was about being a detective.

54


To reach that goal we began producing objects that would be recognised as a detective’s object: Magnifying glass, pen, notebook, coffee, news paper, fingerprints.

The design style was inspired by flat design (6.3.2 Flat Design).

The visuals were produced in Microsoft PowerPoint using various shapes and figures to illustrate the objects. All objects can be found in the included sketchbook (appendix 22) but here are a few examples of how some of the objects were produced.

The magnifying glass was combined from a circle outline, two half circles, a moon shape and three squares. This is illustrated below in figure 6.3.

Figure 6.3 Creation of the magnifying glass.

The red pin which holds up the levels on the level screen was combined by two circles and two cylinders. This is illustrated below in figure 6.4.

55


Figure 6.4 Creation of the pin.

A shadow was added to objects that needed to stand out. By adding a shadow to an object it would create the effect of making the object look like it is above the background. The shadow was created by a small 60% transparent black square with a width equal to the object. Figure 6.5 shows how a text box could stand out from the background by adding a shadow to it.

56


Figure 6.5 Text Box

A standard button was created in a blue colour to stand out from the sandy coloured background (Figure 6.6). Here a bottom side was added to the blue square to create a look of a clickable button. The bottom side was a square below with a darker blue colour. The text on the button was naturally changed to white as black would have been too dark to see.

Figure 6.6 Button

57


The screens (Figure 6.7) were combined of buttons, text boxes and detective objects. While creating the complete surfaces of the screens it was important that the buttons remained in the same places as they were designed in iteration 1.

Figure 6.7 The main menu, the story intro and level selection

6.5.3 Unity To create an app we decided to use Unity because of our experience with it and because of a lack of skills in other programming languages than c#. Unity is primarily a game engine, but it also has all the tools needed for creating an app and building it for a smartphone. Unity was used to combine the elements into screens but to create more advanced pieces of code like the AR game.

6.5.4 Asset Store & 3D Warehouse Unity’s Asset Store and Google Sketchup’s 3D Warehouse were used to get 3D models which were then modified by editing or removing textures to fit the game’s purposes.

6.5.5 Virtual buttons To make the game as interactive and engaging as possible (2.3 Motivation) we decided to implement virtual buttons provided by Indiana University (2016). The provider created the fundamentals

for

building

interactive

elements

in

Unity

through

virtual

buttons.

58


The virtual buttons work with a prefab called MenuControllerRaycast that utilises a small plane as the area of effect where the raycast detection is possible. The prefab also contains a collider to get an output if the detection happens inside of it (Figure 6.8). The prefab also takes two arrays of game objects as input and stores them for two different modes that the buttons can be in; menu mode and content mode. In the menu mode the content is invisible and a foreach loop is deactivating each gameobject using “SetActive(false)� (Figure 6.9).

Figure 6.8 Raycast above the cigarette with the associated content on the right (Textbox and button).

Figure 6.9: code displaying the menu mode

59


The content mode works similarly, but reversed. A foreach loop is activating each gameobject called “content associated” by activating it in the hierarchy. Inside the script there is a method called “void TouchEvent ()” and as a part of that the code “mode = !mode;” is changing a boolean called “ mode” to the opposite when the object is touched. So when the script is in “ menu mode” the “ mode” boolean is true, but when the object is touched the boolean becomes false entering the “content mode”. Originally the script was configured to make the menu button inactive when the content appeared, however in this game the other virtual buttons sho uld be active simultaneously with the content, so the line of code disabling other virtual buttons was removed. For each button to have a “close” option, the sphere collider changes position to where the exit button should be placed. Figure 6.10 illustrates that the exit button first of all is initialised with a public vector3 and a public float. Then the sphere collider of the “MenuControllerRaycast” prefab is called using “GetComponent”. The position and size is later made equal to the exit buttons values. In addition another script with very similar code with inspiration from this, was created using a box collider instead of a sphere. This was more suitable in relation to certain objects.

Figure 6.10 code from the MenuControllerRaycast script displaying the exit button functionality

Inside the ARCamera provided by Vuforia the script “TouchController” is placed (Figure 6.11). Firstly a “RaycastHit” is created which can be used later when the ray is constructed. The “RaycastHit” is storing information when a collider is hit, and measure it to which object is intercepted by the ray. Next is a for-loop that counts touch inputs, and makes the touch more reliable as the

60


touch does not take a specific amount of fingers touching the screen simultaneously. No matter how many fingers, the ray should still work. In the line below the ray is constructed from the current touch coordinates. “Camera.main.ScreenPointToRay” returns a ray going from the main camera through the touch coordinates. If the ray is hit the information is sent to the “MenuControllerRaycast” script and received in the “void TouchEvent ()” method where it is being used.

Figure 6.11 Part of the code the TouchController script used for the virtual buttons

6.5.6 Timer The AR scene in the game needed a timer and so a timer script was made (Figure 6.12). The timer is a simple coroutine counting every second and then loading a new scene when the limit is reached. Public variables are used for the limit and in case the counting should be visible, an open spot for a Text class to display the counting seconds.

61


Figure 6.12 Code example from the timer script

6.5.7 Swipe The swipe feature was made from a built in class in Unity called scrollbar with a changeable float value from 0 to 1, a script called “customSwipe� was made that would change the scene to a scene with a name identical to a public string in the script. This solution required a scene for each intro screen. The scenes with the edges would only change on the scrollbar having a value of 0 or 1, where the middle scenes would have a default value of 0.5 and change to different scenes depending on the scrollbar changing to 0 or 1. To make the scrollbar give the illusion of swipe the handle were resized to have the height of the screen and half the width.

6.5.8 Vuforia Augmented reality requires advanced coding that takes a lot of time to learn. Fortunately a company called Vuforia made it easy for developers to use augmented reality in a nice and easy

62


way with Unity. On Vuforia’s homepage the developer is able to upload pictures that gets processed by a build-in system in order to designate fiducial markers (Figure 6.13). The process is manageable for anyone and allows the imported picture to be instantly used in Unity.

Figure 6.13 https://developer.vuforia.com/targetmanager/singleDeviceTarget/deviceSingleImageTargetDetails

Vuforia uses certain fundamental elements when working in Unity. First of all, the ARCamera which is programmed to track the movements in relation to the fiducial markers on an image and simultaneously around the objects in scenes. (Figure 6.14).

63


Figure 6.14 ARCamera

Vuforia made it possible for us to create a 3D world using augmented reality for an Android smartphone. We decided on 3 pictures as placeholders which supposedly could be something the users would actually put up in their own home. The pictures also need a certain amount of fiducial markers in order to work efficiently, which is the reason why we chose those pictures instead of more minimalistic pictures. The 3D world was implemented so it appears horizontally on the picture as if they were hung on a wall.

64


6.6 Evaluation

The second iteration of the evaluation focused on usability and the participant’s motivation of the high fidelity prototype. A test was executed to test how the game worked, to see if the participants had fun during the test and also if the game encouraged intrinsic motivation.

6.6.1 Theory The evaluation type for this iteration is a formative evaluation as we want to evaluate our prototype during the development with the goal of improving upon flaws and elements that did not work as intended. The formative evaluation can be an effective way of discovering new knowledge in

the

early

stages,

that

can

then

be

used

for

improvements

(Bjørner,

2015).

The usability test was conducted in a controlled environment at the AAU CPH campus (Figure 6.14). With a controlled environment, the test room should be set up exactly as planned before the participant enter the room. The participants were isolated and uninterrupted while the test was conducted to maintain their complete focus (Bjørner, 2015).

Throughout the test the convergent mixed method was used by collecting quantitative and qualitative data separately, which was afterwards interpreted. A questionnaire was made for quantitative data that rated different screens in the app (Appendix 13). The focus was to see how the navigation worked for the app and how they experienced it. The questionnaire was provided online for the participants, on a computer that had been set up, pre-test. The type of options for answering the questionnaire were made with Likert scales to measure the user’s opinion for the different statements (Bjørner, 2015).

65


An interview was conducted for qualitative data to discover how the navigation worked and why they encountered different problems (Appendix 14). The interview was semi-structured in order to make the facilitator able to ask follow up questions and for making the interview more loosely conducted so the participant would be able to speak more freely. Lastly observations were used, also for qualitative data to support the collection of data from the interview and questionnaire, but also for gaining further knowledge about what and why some areas did not work. The observation were planned to be a non-participant observation, with no interference with the participants at all. Two observers were using direct observation while a camera recorded the screen on the smartphone to log the data an d make sure nothing was missed. On the contrary this method contains disadvantages; the results can have certain limitations when the prototype are used in the user’s natural environment, because of the artificial conditions (Bjørner, 2015). To make the observation as structured as possible, we made observation sheets, so the observers could follow without being in doubt of what to observe (Appendix 15; Appendix 16). The observants had differents jobs. One observer focused on facial expressions and how the user experienced the app during each task. The other observer focused on where the test participants were struggling by writing qualitative interpretations of the different problematic areas (Bjørner, 2015).

6.6.2 Test Setting The usability test was conducted in a small controlled environment. There were 3 scannable pictures hanging on the walls on both sides and behind of the participant. The participant and the facilitator were both sitting by the table. The participant had a smartphone in front of him and the facilitator a PC which he later gave the participant to fill in a quantitative questionnaire (Bjørner, 2015). All the participant’s actions were watched by 2 observers who took notes. Everything was recorded by a cameraman and a GoPro camera attached to the wall.

66


Figure 6.14 The setup of the usability test

6.6.3 High Fidelity Prototype Evaluation Evaluation Design Before performing the test, we made sure that the consent form was properly formulated and that the participants had signed it. The test was conducted by one of the researchers in a controlled environment. The participants were introduced to the purpose of the evaluation and were given an overall view on the purpose of the app. The sample group consisted of 10 medialogy students from the second semester. They were randomly selected with the random convenience sampling method (Bjørner, 2015). For our usability test we did not find it necessary to conduct a test on the target group, as the main purpose was on navigation in the app. The medialogy students are in the process of education

67


amongst others on the field of design and user experience, which means their feedback would provide valuable knowledge and new ideas. The convenience sampling can be biased which means that, for a more complex evaluation the researchers should be very careful to use it (Bjørner, 2015). The participants were given tasks they needed to complete while being recorded by two cameras. One to capture and recognise participants emotions and the other with a wide angle on the room to capture users behaviour while playing. There were observants taking notes of the participants actions, struggles and errors while playing the game. After the given tasks had been completed, the participant were then asked to fill the online quantitative questionnaire about the usability of the product (appendix 17). Afterwards the researcher conducted a semi structured interview to gain more in-depth knowledge about specific elements of the prototype.

Qualitative results and observation The observation of and the comments from the participants showed that 9 out of 10 did not know what to do when the game had started. They felt that they did not have the knowledge of how augmented reality worked and said there was no real indication that the game had started. There was a problem with ending the game when the participants had finished the investigation. Most of the participants did not see the button “End Investigation� or had problems pressing it without zooming in, because of the raycast not working properly on larger distances. Only one participant succeeded before the time ran out. Some participants noticed that the 3D models in the story introduction did not match the flat design of the app and they found there was too much text. The large amount of information caused the participants to forget some of the details about the case. On the topic of the 3D models, there was a comment that it would be better if there were more models that was interactive, including the 3D character models and more clues. Some suggested that the swipe function in the app introduction did not work smoothly and that it should be changed to a scroll function like in the read more screen. Lastly when loading the camera the app seemed frozen, causing concern for some of the participants. They did not know what was going to happen next and were touching the screen in confusion.

Quantitative results The result from the questionnaire (Figure 6.15) showed that the introduction and the read more screens were the least liked by the participants. The test participants felt the game itself was

68


exciting and found the story interesting. The results made it clear that the participants were very motivated throughout the game. The content of the read more screen was found indifferent.

Figure 6.15 Quantitative questionnaire answers

The average ratings of the questionnaire can be used to see if there are any problems that should be addressed in the specific areas.

69


7. 3rd Iteration 7.1 Discussion on and new requirements

After analysing the results and the participant’s comments, a list of problems and solutions was created in order to get a clear overview of how to make the prototype better. 1) They did not understand that the camera was on or how to use augmented reality. a) Since augmented reality is a relatively new technology, more information about how augmented reality works was added to the introduction. b) Like on a normal video camera, there was put an image saying "Camera ON" in the upper left corner, to indicate the camera was in use. c) A help screen was implemented, to help the users while playing the game in case they did not read or forgot something in the introduction. 2) The End investigation button did not work. a) The problem occurred since the collider of the box, was not big enough, so the solution for that was to expand the collider and increase the raycast. 3) The story was too long. a) To minimise the story, the user was provided only with the most important information

in the story intro. b) New elements were implemented into the 3D world that should inform the users of the

missing details. 4) Change the police officer to flat design.

70


a) Make a flat design version of the police officer. 5) The Read More screen was too long and boring. a) The problem here was that the read more screen was long and boring and to change that, it would need to be written with headlines and less scientifically. 6) The introduction screen had a bad swipe. a) A smoother swipe was made. 7) Participants tried to tap on the 3D character models. a) This problem was identified, when the participants tried to tap the characters and to solve this, the characters should be interactive and have information on them. 8) Participants was tapping multiple times on the story screen before the AR and thought the screen was frozen. a) Created a loading screen to show the users that the game was still loading. 9) They did not answer correctly for the conclusion of the game. a) Since this was the first level and the users were supposed to be able to answer correctly without too much trouble, more obvious clues were added to accommodate that. This was also done to keep the user in flow (2.3.2 Intrinsic motivation) 10) The first AR scene was blinking when the player got close. a) A new scene was created to assemble the different 3D objects into one model. 11) They were unsure whether they had explored everything in the game. a) Objectives were implemented so the users would know when they are done searching for clues. Most of the problems with the prototype could be solved simply by improving upon what had already been made. The only solutions that required that we added something new was the help screen, the loading screen and the objectives for when the users are done searching for clues. The swiping indicators mentioned in the discussion of the results from the first iteration (6.1 Discussion and new requirements), were not implemented for the second evaluation, but during the test, it became clear, that when the app was used on a real phone, everyone intuitively swiped. This means that the swiping indicators are not relevant to implement.

Bias As mentioned in the Evaluation section(7.5.4 Setting) the room was filled with 4 researchers and one participant. It might have caused discomfort and pressure, which could affect the experience and the participants overall performance.

71


7.2 Design

The design of the third iteration was made based on the results of the second iteration. No big decisions were taken when it came to the design of the third iteration, since it was apparent from the discussion of the second iteration that the only thing that needed to be designed was a help screen.

7.3 Skeleton It was only necessary to look at the skeleton of the help screen, since all the visuals had already been established in the second iteration. The help should simply follow those for aesthetics.

7.3.1 Help Screen To help the users understand how to use AR, we decided that the option of seeing a help screen should be implemented. It should provide guidelines for how to use the AR in the game. 2 of the 7 laws of user interface design (2.8.4 Seven laws of User Interface(UI) Design) were used for designing the screen:

72




The law of clarity, which says that everything should be clear and easy to understand.



The law of easing, which says that the user is more inclined to perform a complex action if it is broken down into steps. The reason why these laws were taken into consideration, was that we wanted to make the

user able to quickly learn the basics of how to use AR in a way that is not overwhelming, otherwise the user might ignore the help.

We wanted the help screen to be an optional addition to the game, so the users can choose themselves if they want it or not. We decided to put the button for opening the help screen, in the top right corner of the AR camera. That way it would be visible at all times if the user needed it, while not being a nuisance. To prevent the user from pausing the game and cheating with the time, we decided that the help screen should not pause it when opened, therefore making it important that the timer was visible at all times in the help screen. To follow the law of easing, the help screen should be divided into small parts, starting with how to get the 3D models on the screen, then how to inspect the models and lastly showing that it is possible to interact with objects. This should be done following the law of clarity. We decided it would be best to write one, short, precise sentence for each of the help parts and then have an illustration for each of them. A sketch for the help screen can be seen in figure 7.1. Figure 7.1 Sketch of the help screen

73


7.4 Implementation

The new list of requirements gathered from the second iteration test, allowed for the implementation of improvements in the prototype and made it more user friendly. This section describes the current look of the prototype and presents all the improvements that have been implemented.

7.4.1 Objectives The objectives in the game served as visual feedback to the user. The different objective boxes becomes checked when the user finds every pressable object in a specific area in the game.

74


Figure 7.2 The code for whether an objective is cleared or not.

A script containing the piece of code seen in figure 7.2 was produced with the ability to check if the objects had been pressed. It contains an array of booleans and an array of equal length containing gameobjects called “bool#.#”, which gets activated in the hierarchy by virtual buttons (6.5.5 Virtual buttons). The first # is the scenery number and the second # is the entity number. The for-loop uses the variable “i” to go through the boolean array and sets booleans to true if a gameobject in the same position in the gameobject array is active in the hierarchy. To check if all the gameobjects exist, an integer variable counts upwards by 1 for every true boolean in the boolean array and replacing the active gameobject making the boolean true with a newly instantiated prefab called “bool0.0”. “bool0.0” is always false to prevent the counter from going up if the same gameobject is activated several times. When the counting integer reaches a size equal to the length of the boolean array, a single public boolean becomes true and the empty checkmark

75


image changes to a “checked” checkmark image through an if statement and two “textures2Ds” as seen in figure 7.3. One script like this was used for each scene. The scripts appearance in Unity can be seen in figure 7.4.

Figure 7.3 The if statement that “checks” the objective box

Figure 7.4 Multiboolean script applied as a component in the Unity inspector

7.4.2 Better swipe The swipe feature was made from a build in class in Unity’s Monodevelop, enabling a panel to move freely or restricted inside another panel. A script (Figure 7.5) was co ded to limit the movement options that the inside panel had for it, to look and feel like the swipe function used in modern smartphones and applications.

76


Figure 7.5 The code for a better swipe

To access the position of the panel, it was connected to a horizontal scrollbar with a value span from 0 to 1, the value changes from 0 when the inner panel is at its leftmost position to 1 at its rightmost position (Figure 7.6), the inner panels movements are limited by the outer panel. The swipe feature uses an array of float values from 0 to 1, in a script called locks, to know when the panel should stop moving. When the panel is pressed it can be dragged freely, but when it is released it moves to the nearest lock either left or right.

77


Figure 7.6 the panels for the introduction screen.

7.4.3 Help screen Many test participants had a hard time understanding how AR works. To help them, a help screen was made available when in the game. Since the build in button function in Unity does not work with Vuforia, GUI buttons were used in their stead. Instead of showing the help with GUIs, a picture was used. It was made in Adobe Illustrator and was designed according to our previous designs (5.4 Skeleton; 6.3 Surface). It can be seen in figure 7.7. The spacing below the last illustration was made, so that the closing GUI buttons would not overlap other content of the screen.

Figure 7.7 Picture that was made for the help screen

To implement the GUI buttons, “void OnGUI()” was used as seen in figure 7.8. It was important that the app worked on all screen sizes, so “Screen.width” and “Screen.height” were used to place and scale every element according to the size of the screen. “GU IStyles” were made to change the size of fonts of the GUI text, and were scaled in the same way.

78


To load the picture that contained the help, a variable called “Texture2D” was used. When “GUI.Button” is pressed, a boolean called “txtBox” becomes true. Whe n that boolean is true, the “GUI.DrawTexture” loads the picture so it fits the entire screen. It is possible to see the top bar with the timer and the objectives in the bottom, even though the picture is made to fill the whole screen. This is because the picture is cropped in Adobe Photoshop so that there is an invisible space in the top and in the bottom. This was done to make it easier to fit the picture in the app screen perfectly. To close the help screen, a “GUI.Button” that makes the “txtBox” boolean false, was put in the bottom of the picture with the same principles as the first button (Figure 7.8).

Figure 7.8 The help screen code

7.4.4 Tap on characters Results from the usability test suggested that interaction with the characters in the last scene seemed very relevant to implement. The majority of the participants felt it was disappointing or frustrating that they were not able to touch the characters and gain more information. The implementation was very similar to the rest of the interactive objects (6.5.2 Virtual buttons). While most of the objects had a shape that could more or less fit in the sphere collider, the shape of the characters were much more rectangular. For that reason the script “MenuControllerRaycast” (Figure 7.9) was used as the basis for a more appropriate script that took the variables of a bo x collider instead of a sphere. With the exception of the box collider, the two scripts worked similarly.

79


Figure 7.9 characters with box colliders surrounding them

7.4.5 Loading screen When the game goes from the story introduction to the AR game, the app has to load for about 3 - 4 seconds. The evaluation of the second iteration revealed that most of the test participants thought the app had frozen during that loading time, and started pressing around the screen. In order to help the users know what is going on, a loading screen was implemented. To prevent the users from being confused, the loading screen received an indicator showing that the app is not frozen. This was achieved by using multithreading, or in the case of Unity, coroutines as seen in figure 7.10.

80


Figure 7.10 The loading screen code

The coroutine function “LoadNewScene()” has to be set as an “IEnumerator” with a yield return statement, which states at which point the function pauses to be resumed in the next frame. The way the app loads the level was done with an “AsyncOperation”, so it could load while running something else, after that it takes the int of a scene number which should be loaded. In the end of the function, a while-loop that checked if the “ AsyncOperation” was done, was added, so the app would continue running something else until the loading was done. To actually run the coroutine we first had to make sure that it only loaded the scene once. This was done with a boolean called “LoadScene” in the Update. If the boolean was false, it would set itself to true and at the same time access the text from Unity and start the coroutine with “StartCoroutine(LoadNewScene());”. The reason why this only makes it load once, is because the boolean is never made false again so it only runs the code once. To help the users see that the app was not frozen, text saying “Loading... ” was added through a text field in Unity, which was then assessed in the code. To illustrate that the app was still working and not frozen in the loading screen, the loading text was made to pulse. This was done by accessing the text’s colours and with “Mathf.PingPong”, the Alpha of the text went between 1f and zero, as long as the boolean “LoadScene” was true. This was running together with the coroutine until it was done and the AR scene was loaded.

81


7.5 Final Evaluation

7.5.1 Evaluation Design The evaluated prototype was designed to answer the following problem statement:

“How can teens in the age of 16-19 with a sedentary behaviour, be intrinsically motivated during an active break through a mobile game?”

7.5.2 Theory To answer the Final Problem Statement we have designed a summative evaluation (Bjørner, 2015). Summative evaluation is commonly used to test what the project has achieved. As all the prototype’s improvements were implemented it was proper to test its impact on the target group. The method used was convergent mixed method (Bjørner, 2015):

Quantitative data + Qualitative data → Interpretation.

We used this method according to the IMI device report the first quantitative part of it suits gathering data about the user’s intrinsic motivation (4. Methods).

82


Since the first data collected from this test would not include user's reasoning for giving specific feedback, we have also conducted a qualitative semi structured interview (Bjørner, 2015). Lastly to minimise missed valuable data, while the participants were testing, the conducting researcher was doing a non-participant observation. Additionally the observer was directly observing the participants. The purpose of it was to note down all the moments where the participants struggled and what kind of help they needed (Bjørner, 2015).

7.5.3 Setting The evaluation setting was placed in the natural environment of users which was their own home. For that reason there was no guidance when it came to using the app, unless the user was completely stuck. However the developers were present during the test to observe the participants interaction with the application. Some of the tests were recorded on a fixed wall camera.

7.5.4 Questionnaire The questionnaire was done according to the IMI device (4. Methods) with an intention to focus on the participants’ intrinsic motivation to play the game. For our tests purpose we decided to use 6 out of 7 IMI instruments which were:

Interest/Enjoyment

Pressure/Tension

Perceived Competence

Effort/Importance

Value/Usefulness

Perceived choice

The last, Perceived choice did not fit our purpose so we changed the questions accordingly. The instrument that we did not use was Relatedness. This one refers to participant’s relations with people which our prototype does not include. The scale for answers was from 1 to 7 where 1 meant not true at all and 7 very true. Some of the questions answers had to be reversed which was done by subtracting their value fro m 8.

83


7.5.5 Sampling The sampling methods (Bjørner, 2015) used for collecting participants were quota sampling with pre-specified attributes; young people between 16 and 19 who lead a sedentary lifestyle. To increase the number of participants, the snowball sampling method was used within the boundaries of our target group. 10 participants were recruited as the evaluation design required the researchers to conduct the evaluation at the participant's home.

7.5.6 Results Quantitative The results of the quantitative questionnaire have been grouped into 6 groups to find out how motivated the users were in the specific areas. These split results are presented in figure 7.11.

SCALE 1-7 Participant Interest

/ Pressure

/ Perceived

Effort

/ Value

/ Perceived

#

Enjoyment

Tension

Competence

Importance

Usefulness

Choice

1

5.6

2.6

6.7

6.7

5.7

5.5

2

6.8

4.4

6.3

7.0

5.7

5.0

3

5.8

2.2

6.3

5.3

4.7

5.0

4

6.6

2.6

6.0

4.3

5.0

6.0

5

6.0

3.0

5.3

5.3

4.0

4.5

6

6.6

1.2

6.7

3.0

6.3

6.5

7

5.8

3.6

6.0

5.0

5.0

4.5

8

7.0

1.6

7.0

5.3

5.3

7.0

9

5.4

4.0

5.3

7.0

5.7

6.0

10

6.6

3.8

6.7

6.3

6.0

6.5

Average

6.2

2.9

6.2

5.5

5.3

5.7

Figure 7.11 The quantitative results.

In figure 7.11 it is clearly visible that the average for Interest and Enjoyment is 6.2 which indicates that the participants felt the activities they did were fun.

84


The average for Pressure and Tension was 2.9, which says that most of the participants did not feel pressured during the activity. The Perceived Competence scored 6.2, which says that the participants felt very competent while using the prototype. The Effort and Importance scored 5.5, which says that most of the participants put a lot effort into the activity and felt it could be important to them. The Value and Usefulness scored 5.3, which says that most participants felt that the activity had some value to them and they would do it again. The Perceived Choice was 5.7, which says that most participants felt that they had some sort of freedom, while doing this activity.

Qualitative To analyse the data we followed the four steps of traditional coding (Bjørner, 2015). As the interviews were voice recorded we did transcriptions. After that the transcriptions were analysed to extract the relevant content of the answers. Then we did meaning condensations to the answers of each question. The answers are grouped into the condensated meanings of the questions (Appendix 18).

Story Most of the participants thought the story was fun. They said the story was very simple, but not too simple and because of that, they felt it interesting. There were two people who would like the story to be longer. One participant felt the story was too complicated at the beginning.

Time pressure The opinions were very split when it came to feeling pressured. Some of the participants did not notice the timer and some just ignored it. Two of them said they were given a perfect amount of time to solve the case.

Freedom All of the participants felt having freedom in exploring the evidence and considered it as a good thing. A couple of participants said doing it in AR felt like reality because of ha ving to find stuff on their own.

85


Feeling of competence Most of the participants understood the game very quickly and said it was not a big challenge for them. Two participants had to adjust themselves to the controls at first. Most of the participants explained that they felt more confident in playing the game when they found objects and got feedback from clicking on them.

Solving the case The case was quite easy, but still interesting for the participants. Although all of them guessed who the perpetrator was, almost all of them said they felt satisfied when they guessed right.

Taking a break While some of the participants felt it was nice taking a break and standing up, others just wanted to play the game and did not notice that what they were doing was having a break fro m sedentary behaviour.

Other comments Some of the suggestions participants had for the game, was a bonus level, with a deeper more complex story and more pictures. The most useful comment regarded the timer. The participant suggested that the timer should be in the middle of the screen for the first two seconds to indicate that the time is running out and then move to the original place.

Observations Observatory results provided useful information about the usability part of the application. Even though the “End Investigation� button was re-implemented (7.4 Implementation) some of the participants still had problems using it. They either could not find it or had problems clicking it. Other acknowledged problems were that a couple of participants shifted the proper order of scanning the pictures or did not understand the objectives which were also displayed in the corresponding order. When it comes to performance, even though it was explained in the introduction and in the help screen, in almost all cases it took a while until the participants understood that they can click on the objects to get information about them. Regardless of the fact that the participants had smaller problems, they all pointed out the correct perpetrator.

86


7.6 Discussion The final evaluation revealed very positive results. The prototype occured to work very efficiently in fulfilling its function which was intrinsically motivating the sedentary young people between 16-19 to take an active break. To understand its cause we analysed the evaluations results taking into consideration the validity of received results and the possible bias. The outcome is presented in this section.

7.6.1 Analysis of the results The results clearly showed that the participants felt motivated while playing the game. Although the timer did not serve its purpose to the full extent, the participants were interested in the story’s outcome and enjoyed exploring the AR world. The cause of the great interest and positive results (6.2 out of 7 in Interest / Enjoyment) might have been because of the way the story was narrated and that the crime scenes were implemented with an AR technology which gave freedom in exploring the game. Because this was the first time the participants experienced AR, it might have given a more positive response from them. Most of the participants grasped the controls after a very short time and although the case was a bit too easy they felt satisfied when solving it. For future levels the difficulty should increase with new opportunities so it matches the user’s skills as we know from Csikszentmihalyi’s (1975) research on the flow theory (2.3.2 Intrinsic Motivation). Evaluation 2’s results showed that the participants had problems with understanding how the AR works. They did not zoom in and hardly explored the implemented world. It is fair to assume that the new introduction screens and help screen might have helped the participants to understand how to use the prototype. When it comes to the break, the evaluation revealed that some of the participants thought it was a good idea to stand up during game time, while others did not notice that they were taking a break, because they were immersed in the gameplay. Feedback from the interview says that making the story shorter resulted in an interesting and pleasant introduction to the game. Compared to the bad ratings it got in the second Evaluation, the story now supports the Interest / Enjoyment score of the game. The story could have been an even better experience for the user as pictures could have been animated and the text could have been told through audio sound by the device. Having a novelist write the story might make the game even more interesting to the users. The prototype we created misses the functions which would enable the users to schedule their play time and remind them when they should take a break. Combined with SitCoach (2.5

87


SOTA) the prototype would be a full product and could be a great way to deal with sedentary behaviour.

7.6.2 Validity and Bias The final evaluation was carried out in several households by different facilitators at different times. Additionally most of the participants had a close connection to certain facilitators either as a friend or as family. Many differences during the tests created some bias’ that we had to be aware of. Clarifying bias is crucial for improving the validity of the evaluation and is discussed further in the following section (Bjørner, 2015).

Different facilitators The major challenge with the final evaluation were the differences between the tests. The testing required multiple facilitators testing at different locations and times, and the results might have been affected by the many possible conditions. Firstly various facilitators might have had different ways of explaining and conducting the test. Participants could therefore have perceived and experienced certain situations differently. In order to minimise bias, we created a very strict test-procedure, of which the facilitators were to follow very carefully (Appendix 19). The test procedure contained a step by step guide of what to do before, during and after the test. A script was included which the facilitator had to read from. The script was read in the exact same way and order as it was written. Further attempts to minimise bias as much as possible were done by conducting a pilot test with every facilitator present, observing how the test should be conducted. The pilot test was then used to discuss and improve upon the final evaluation to make it fit in the best possible way. Furthermore 6/10 tests were conducted in Danish while the rest were in english. Different translation and understanding in certain situation might have influenced the data, but the similarity of the results implied that the influence has not been significant.

Camera recording In general user performance rise when they know they are being observed (Wickström & Bendix, 2000). In a study initiated in 1924 a phenomenon called the “Hawthorne Effect” arose and became popular amongst researchers working with observations. The original researchers developed the claim that the “increase in output was partly caused by the experimental set-up as such and by the experimenters themselves“ (Wickström & Bendix, 2000).

88


The quote implies that the influence from the researchers observing increased the performance of the participants in the test. The “Hawthorne Effect� will be taken into consideration.

7/10 participants were not video recorded during their test, which means that there might have occurred differences in the results. The participants were still observed during the test and all participants agreed to being video recorded (Appendix 20), which means that The Hawthorne Effect still applied. The analysis of the results showed that there were no significant differences in the performance from those who were recorded on camera and those who were not.

Relation to facilitators The results from the evaluation were generally positive. Criticising them and looking into why, was crucial to increase the validity of the evaluation. 7/10 participants were familiar with their facilitator. Some were friends other were family and the different relations between facilitator and participant, could mean that the participant tried to be nice and acknowledge, that the facilitator accomplished something good, therefore creating a bias regarding the results. This means that they might have answered in a more positive way, than if they had no relation at all. Fortunately 3 participants did not have any relation to their facilitator and their results showed that they in average only scored 0,16 lower than the rest. This was a very insignificant difference, which therefore supported that this bias did not influence the results as much as to make them unreliable. Figure 7.12 shows that the 7/10 participants which had a relation to the facilitator on average rated 4,38 to the questions from the questionnaire. The 3/10 participants which had no relation to the facilitator, rated on average 4,22.

Figure 7.12 Average results from the questionnaire, divided into participants with & without a relation to the facilitator.

Sampling Lastly the sampling of the participants only included boys for testing, if girls were participating the results might have been different. This needs to be taken into consideration.

89


8. Re-design This section presents how the feedback from the last evaluation, can be used to improve existing features in the game, in order to accommodate the users’ needs better.

8.1 Timer One of the elements that can motivate the users is the timer (2.4.1 Game theory). The amount of time left is shown in the middle at the top of the screen. While observing, the researchers found out that most of the users did not notice that the time was running out. After a suggestion from one participant it was decided to show the timer in the middle of the screen as soon as the game starts, and then after a couple of seconds, move it to the top of the screen, as to make the user notice the timer.

8.2 End Investigation button Test participants in the final test did not notice the End investigation button, even though it is a big element compared to the other objects in the scene. This might be because the button did not follow the overall design of the app. Therefore the button needs to be re-implemented following the design of the app and as a GUI element.

8.3 Score When the users finished the level, there was no indication of how well they did, or how much time was left, only whether they got it right or wrong. For a player this is a fairly important aspect of the game, as it can impact the player's extrinsic motivation (2.3.3 Extrinsic Motivation). As long as the activity is still fun, the game could have more rewards e.g. a time or score at the end of each level. Though it could change the user’s focus onto the external reward and minimise the enjoyment and intrinsic motivation for the activity itself (2.3.4 Comparing the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation).

90


9. Conclusion The problem of sedentary behaviour has been increasing (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour) through several years and more scientists keep looking into the area. It is worth to point out that leading a sedentary lifestyle negatively influences people’s health. In Denmark the most exposed to the problem is the young generation which was born as digital natives. Teenagers between 16-19 spend great amounts of time in front of a screen which is associated to being sedentary (2.1 Sedentary Behaviour; 2.2.1 Target Group). The study review showed that taking breaks during the sedentary time can be very beneficial towards people’s health (2.1.2 Sedentary Behaviour). This project has been trying to figure out how to motivate the young people to take a break from sedentary behaviour. The research went through the efficiency and complexity of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and the possibilities of combining them with game elements to create a mobile game (2.3 Motivation). The possibilities of the smartphones sensors allowed for the usage of augmented reality through the camera, which makes the users stand up and actively move around during their break(2.3.5 Sensors in Smartphones; 2.7 Augmented Reality). The prototype was produced by doing several iterations following the 5 steps of good user experience at all times. Evaluating the low and high fidelity prototypes throughout two usability tests improved both navigation and certain usability problems, which were very beneficial to the prototype’s design and reliability during the final evaluation (1. Iteration & 2. Evaluation). The final evaluation included 10 participants within the target group. They were tested in their natural environment (3. Iteration Evaluation). The focus of the evaluation was to answer the final problem statement: “How can teens in the ages of 16-19 with a sedentary behaviour, be intrinsically motivated during an active break through a mobile game?” The results from the final evaluation clearly showed that the short term motivation to play the game was high amongst the participants. In general the game received very positive feedback. The users felt very motivated to use the prototype. Some of them said they would like to play mor e levels and that they would consider taking a break that way. However, the game might have some limitations. The motivation was only measured during a short term, but there was no data gathered for long term because of time limitations. Therefore the game might not be able to maintain long term motivation. Additionally the benefits associated with health have not been measured, which means that no data has been collected and the game might not be as beneficial as desired.

91


10. Future Works This section presents everything that was supposed to be implemented in the prototype as a finished product, but was not implemented because it was not the focus for the final proble m statement. It also contains the most relevant suggestions from the qualitative results of the evaluations. Implementation of Schedule and Notifications We wanted a setup screen to give the users the opportunity to change the interval between their breaks. It should be possible to choose different a span of hours for different days (2.5 SOTA). Implementation of Stats Another thing that should be in the final product would be a screen with visual feedback about the consistency in the user's ability to take breaks, the interval breaks are taken in and how well the user performed in the game. Implementation of a feature where the user gets to choose his own AR targets The user should be able to choose what the camera needs to see in order to show the content. This is to make the app more flexible with the user's preferences with wall adornments. Implementation of activity detection by accelerometer Because of the time limitations the activity detection was not implemented. According to the 2.6.1 Smartphone Sensors section, the users should be notified, as often as they spend a certain previously set amount of time on sedentary activities, to play the game. Implementation of new levels according to the FLOW The flow theory (2.3.2 Intrinsic Motivation) suggests that in order to keep the user motivated, the levels should get harder accordingly to the skill gained by the user. In the future more levels should be implemented containing more complex cases and harder to find clues. Implement Read More screen – to give more freedom To give the user an opportunity to dig deeper into the problem that is sedentary behaviour, the content presented on the read more screen should be re-written, so that it is pleasant to read for the casual user. Currently it is written in an academic language and contain references. The current solution only serves as a placeholder.

92


Reference List Babey, S. H. & Hastert, T. A. & Wolstein, J. (2013) Adolescent sedentary behaviors: Correlates differ for television viewing and computer use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 52(1), 70-76. Bjørner, T. (2015) Qualitative Methods For Consumer Research, Hans Reitzels Forlag Cotman, C. W. & McGaugh, J. L. (2014) Behavioral neuroscience: An introduction. Academic Press. Craig, A. B. (2013) Understanding augmented reality: Concepts and applications. Newnes. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975) Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of humanistic psychology. Dansk Statistik (2016, March 15) Anvendelse af internet på mobiltelefonen (16-74 år) efter formål, type og tid. Retrieved from: http://www.statistikbanken.dk/BEBRIT15 Dantzig, S. & Geleijnse, G. & Halteren, A. T. (2013) Toward a persuasive mobile application to reduce sedentary behavior. Personal and ubiquitous computing, 17(6), 1237-1246. Developer.Android (2016, March 8) Sensors Overview. Retrieved from: https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/sensors/sensors_overview.html Garrett, J. J. (2010a) Elements of user experience, the: user-centered design for the web and beyond. Pearson Education. New Riders Garrett, J. J. (2010b, December 26) The Elements of User Experience: User-Centered Design for the Web and Beyond (2nd Edition). New Riders Halliday, D. (2016) Fundamentals of Physics Extended: 10th Edition. Content Technologies, Inc Hassenzahl, M. & Tractinsky, N. (2006) User experience-a research agenda. Behaviour & information technology, 25(2), 91-97.

93


Healy, G. N. & Dunstan, D. W. & Salmon, J. & Cerin, E. & Shaw, J. E. & Zimmet, P. Z. & Owen, N. (2008) Breaks in sedentary time beneficial associations with metabolic risk. Diabetes care, 31(4), 661-666. Indiana University (2016, April 30) RaycastMenuController.unitypackage. Retrieved from https://iu.app.box.com/s/wlkv4yspka8nho2blzgf7qbanm0a22sg (Virtual Buttons) Jans, M. P. & Proper, K. I. & Hildebrandt, V. H. (2007) Sedentary behavior in Dutch workers: differences between occupations and business sectors. American journal of preventive medicine, 33(6), 450-454. Johnson, R. R. (1998) User-centered technology: A rhetorical theory for computers and other mundane artifacts. New York, NY:SUNY Press. Kapp, K. M. (2012) The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons. Kuniavsky, M. (2007) User experience and HCI. The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications, 2nd Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, New York, USA. Liu, M. (2013) A study of mobile sensing using smartphones. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2013. Lou, D. (2014) Sedentary Behaviors and Youth: Current Trends and the Impact on Health. San Diego, CA: Active Living Research; 2014. Available from: www.activelivingresearch.org. Lowe, S. & Ă“Laighin, G. (2012) The age of the virtual trainer. Elsevier Ltd, Procedia Engineering, 34, 242-247. Lynch, B. M. (2010) Sedentary behavior and cancer: a systematic review of the literature and proposed biological mechanisms. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 19(11), 26912709. Miyachi, M. & Yamamoto, K. & Ohkawara, K. & Tanaka, S. (2010) METs in adults while playing active video games: a metabolic chamber study. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 42(6), 1149-1153.

94


Nincarean, D. & Alia, M. B. & Halim, N. D. A. & Rahman, M. H. A. (2013) Mobile augmented reality: The potential for education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 657-664. Norman, D. A. (1986) Cognitive engineering. User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction, 3161. Norman, D. A. (2013) The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic books. Overgaard, K. & Grøntved, A. & Nielsen, K. & Dahl-Petersen, I. K. & Aadahl, M. (2012) Stillesiddende adfærd-en helbredsrisiko?. Vidensråd for Forebyggelse. Owen, N. & Bauman, A. & Brown, W. (2009) Too much sitting: a novel and important predictor of chronic disease risk?. British journal of sports medicine, 43(2), 81-83. Paluska, S. A. & Schwenk, T. L. (2000) Physical activity and mental health. Sports medicine, 29(3), 167-180. Pratas, A. (2014) Creating flat design websites. Packt Publishing Ltd. Preece, P. & Rogers, Y. & Sharp, H. (2015) Interaction Design - beyond human-computer interaction. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 4th edition. Prensky, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Roopchand-Martin, S. & Nelson, G. & Gordon, C. & Sing, S. Y. (2015) A pilot study using the XBOX Kinect for exercise conditioning in sedentary female university students. Technology and Health Care, 23(3), 275-283. Roshanaei-Moghaddam, B. & Katon, W. J. & Russo, J. (2009) The longitudinal effects of depression on physical activity. General hospital psychiatry, 31(4), 306-315. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York: Plenum Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68.

95


Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2002) Handbook of self-determination research. University Rochester Press. Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E. (2004) Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. MIT press.

Samsung (2014, April 4) 10 Sensors of Galaxy S5: Heart Rate, Finger Scanner and more. Retrieved from: https://news.samsung.com/global/10-sensors-of-galaxy-s5-heart-rate-fingerscanner-and-more Selby, K. (2015) Simple solutions for sedentary behaviour risks. Occupational Health & Wellbeing, 67(11), 16. Self Determination Theory (2016, May 6) Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). Retrieved from: http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/ Shoaib, M. & Scholten, H. & Havinga, P. J. (2013, December) Towards physical activity recognition using smartphone sensors. In Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on and 10th International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing (UIC/ATC) (pp. 80-87). IEEE. Schuler, D. & Namioka, A. (1993) Participatory design: Principles and practices. CRC Press. Slentz, C. A. & Houmard, J. A. & Kraus, W. E. (2007) Modest exercise prevents the progressive disease associated with physical inactivity. Exercise and sport sciences reviews, 35(1), 18-23 Spinuzzi, C. (2005) The methodology of participatory design. Technical communication, 52(2), 163-174. Statista (2015, August) Number of Mobile Phone Users in Denmark from 2011 to 2019 (in millions). Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/statistics/274755/forecast-of-mobile-phone-usersin-denmark/ Tremblay, M. S. & LeBlanc, A. G. & Kho, M. E. & Saunders, T. J. & Larouche, R. & Colley, R. C. & Goldfield, G. & Gorber, S. C. (2011) Systematic review of sedentary behaviour and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 8(1), 98.

96


Vukovic, P. (2014, January 15) 7 Unbreakable Laws of User Interface Design. Retrieved from: https://99designs.dk/blog/tips/7-unbreakable-laws-of-user-interface-design/ Warren, T. Y. & Barry, V. & Hooker, S. P. & Sui, X. & Church, T. S. & Blair, S. N. (2010) Sedentary behaviors increase risk of cardiovascular disease mortality in men. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 42(5), 879. WickstrÜm, G. & Bendix, T. (2000) The" Hawthorne effect"—what did the original Hawthorne studies actually show?. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 363-367.

97


Appendix 1 The percentage of the civilians who have more than four hours of sedentary activity, in their spare time.

98


Appendix 2 The first usability questionnaire

99


Appendix 3 HTX sukkertop target group result.

Hvor gam Tidsstempel mel er du?

08/03/2016 11.23.14 08/03/2016 11.24.11

18

18

Køn

Hvor mange timer af din fritid bruger du i gennemsnit om dagen på stillesiddende aktiviteter (f.eks. se TV, spille computer, sidde med en iPad)

Mand

2-3 timer

Mand

6 timer eller mere

Hvor mange gange om Når du ugen dyrker dyrker motion, hvor du meget tid motion? bruger du (Sport, så ad træning, gangen? løb, cykling osv.)

Sjælden Jeg dyrker Tidsmangel t ikke motion

3 gange 31-60 min.

18

Kvinde

4-5 timer

1 gang

08/03/2016 11.28.22

18

Mand

2-3 timer

3 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 11.29.45

18

Mand

6 timer eller mere

Sjælden 31-60 min. t

08/03/2016 11.30.21

18

Mand

2-3 timer

4 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 11.30.43

18

2-3 timer

2 gange

17

Mand

4-5 timer

5 eller mere

08/03/2016 11.33.08

16 eller yngre

Kvinde

4-5 timer

1 gang

Hvor ser du dig selv?

Mere fritid

Fjernsynsf reak

En eller anden form for ekstra motivation

Gamer

fordi min fysioterapeo ud ville slå mig ned 31-60 min. hvis jeg ikke gjorde.. og fordi det er sjovt.

08/03/2016 11.26.37

08/03/2016 11.32.01

Jeg føler ikke, at jeg skal brug mere end en time

Hvad kunne få dig til at dyrke mere motion?

Mere end 90 min.

sejler, og perle entujast

Fjernsynsf reak Ved ikke

Ved ikke

Facebook fan fritid

tid

Fordi jeg har fritids arbejde og Mindre end er i Mindre lektier og 30 min. uddannelse. arbejde. Så har ikke tid til mere motion. Mere end 90 min.

Både ha.er

fodbold freak

Gamer

Internet surfer

100


08/03/2016 11.33.22

20

Mand

6 timer eller mere

3 gange

Mere end 90 min.

08/03/2016 11.33.26

16 eller yngre

Kvinde

2-3 timer

5 eller mere

31-60 min.

08/03/2016 11.34.29

17

Mand

2-3 timer

3 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 11.35.53

16 eller yngre

Kvinde

6 timer eller mere

3 gange 31-60 min.

aner det ikke

ved ikke Mobilspille r

fordi jeg har godt af det

Fordi jeg ikke kan holde ud at sidde for længe

Mobilspille r pas

Læsehest

Mindre lektier

Facebook fan

aner det ikke

Facebook fan

Resultater

Gamer

08/03/2016 11.36.32

18

Kvinde

2-3 timer

08/03/2016 11.36.46

16 eller yngre

Kvinde

4-5 timer

Sjælden Mindre end t 30 min.

08/03/2016 11.37.28

17

Mand

4-5 timer

Sjælden Jeg dyrker t ikke motion

08/03/2016 11.39.22

17

Mand

2-3 timer

2 gange 61-90 min.

Internet surfer

08/03/2016 11.39.23

20

Kvinde

2-3 timer

2 gange 31-60 min.

Er sammem med venner

08/03/2016 11.40.36

18

Kvinde

2-3 timer

2 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 11.41.47

18

Mand

4-5 timer

Sjælden Jeg dyrker ER ligeglad t ikke motion med det bro

08/03/2016 11.42.53

18

Mand

2-3 timer

2 gange 31-60 min.

08/03/2016 11.42.57

17

Mand

4-5 timer

2 gange 31-60 min.

08/03/2016 11.43.28

18

Kvinde

2-3 timer

3 gange 31-60 min.

08/03/2016 11.47.03

18

Kvinde

0-1 timer

3 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 11.48.43

18

Kvinde

2-3 timer

2 gange 31-60 min.

08/03/2016 11.49.08

18

Mand

4-5 timer

5 eller mere

set er så lang tid træning er

31-60 min.

5 eller mere

Mindre end 30 min.

Doven

fordi det er sjovt

Hvis jeg havde mere tid

Internet surfer

Det ikke var hårdt

Internet surfer

Hvis jeg havde mere fritid

Facebook fan

Fitness blev billigere. Vejret blev varmere

Alkoholike r Facebook fan

fordi det er sund og sjovt

passende længde til løb, cykel mm.

aner det ikke

menneske r

hvis jeg havde mere tid

Internet surfer

gamer + længere til skole internetsur fer

08/03/2016 11.49.30

17

Mand

2-3 timer

5 eller mere

Jeg finder det interasandt, 61-90 min. og jeg har stærkt sammenhol d

08/03/2016 11.49.53

17

Mand

2-3 timer

3 gange,

31-60 min., Min krop er Energien jeg får 61-90 min. mit tempel efter at have

Mere fritid

Sportsidiot

Læsehest

101


4 gange

dyrket motion er det bedste

Jeg dyrker Sjælden ikke motion, Det er sundt t Mindre end 30 min.

Hvis jeg havde tid

Læsehest

2-3 timer

1 gang

hvis jeg ikke boede ude, og havde mere tid

Internet surfer

Mand

2-3 timer

Sjælden Jeg dyrker t ikke motion

Ikke tid

Mindre lektier og arbejde.

Gamer

17

Kvinde

4-5 timer

2 gange 31-60 min.

genoptræni ng

ingen skader

gamer/læs ehest/rolle spiller

08/03/2016 11.58.03

16 eller yngre

Mand

4-5 timer

1 gang

bare for at have det sjovt

det ved jeg ikke

Gamer

08/03/2016 11.58.27

17

Kvinde

2-3 timer

Sjælden Jeg dyrker t ikke motion

jeg er doven

Hvis jeg fik penge for det

Internet surfer

Det er så meget min ven og jeg har tid til.

08/03/2016 11.50.38

17

08/03/2016 11.54.40

19

08/03/2016 11.55.14

19

08/03/2016 11.58.08

Mand

6 timer eller mere

31-60 min.

61-90 min.

08/03/2016 12.03.29

19

Mand

4-5 timer

3 gange 61-90 min.

08/03/2016 12.03.59

16 eller yngre

Kvinde

2-3 timer

1 gang

fordi jeg godt kan lide at holde fordi jeg gerne 61-90 min., pulsen oppe vil tabe mig, og 2 gange Mere end og stopper være aktiv, da 90 min. først når jeg det føles godt at føler jeg få pulsen op ikke har mere energi

08/03/2016 12.04.28

17

Kvinde

2-3 timer

08/03/2016 12.07.57

18

Mand

6 timer eller mere

08/03/2016 12.08.10

18

Mand

0-1 timer

08/03/2016 12.10.28

17

Mand

2-3 timer

Mindre end 30 min.

Sjælden Jeg dyrker t ikke motion 5 eller mere

Løber en kort tur

Mangel af motivation

Mere end 90 min.

3 gange 61-90 min. Det er sundt

08/03/2016 12.10.31

17

2-3 timer

5 eller mere

Mere end 90 min.

08/03/2016 12.13.32

18

2-3 timer

4 gange

Mere end 90 min.

08/03/2016 12.14.31

17

Kvinde

6 timer eller mere

08/03/2016 12.14.40

17

Mand

4-5 timer

Det tager mere end 90 min.

31-60 min.

Hvis vejret var godt

Mobilspille r

Internet surfer

Ved at det er mere underholdende

Internet surfer

Mere fritid

Idrætsmen neske

Hvis jeg havde tid En blanding Jeg tror hellere af en jeg burde skære læsehest/ ned gamer/soc ial person Mobilspille r

Mindre end Ellers bliver 2 gange 30 min., 31jeg tyk. 60 min. 5 eller mere

Internet surfer

Fordi jeg cykler til skole.

sjovere aktiviteter (mangler motivation)

Gamer

Højt sandsynligt ingen ting.

Internet surfer

102


08/03/2016 12.15.23

18

Mand

4-5 timer

Jeg har omkring 20 SjĂŚlden Mindre end min til skole Jeg mangler kun Facebook t 30 min. nĂĽr jeg motivation fan vĂŚlger at tage cyklen.

103


Appendix 4 Tårnby gymnasium target group result.

Hvor mange timer af din fritid bruger du i gennemsn Hvor it om Tidsst gamm Køn dagen på empel el er stillesidde du? nde aktiviteter (f.eks. se TV, spille computer, sidde med en iPad)

Hvor mange gange Holder Hvor om Hvad du lang tid ugen laver du i pause varer din dyrker din pause fra den pause du fra den stillesid fra den motion stillesidd dende stillesidd ? ende aktivitet ende (Sport, aktivitet? ? aktivitet? træning , løb, cykling osv.)

11/03/ 2016 17 13.46. 49

Kvin 4-5 timer de

Altid (ca. 1 gang i timen)

11/03/ 2016 18 13.47. 11

Kvin 2-3 timer de

Ofte (ca. 1 gang hver 2. time)

Man 2-3 timer d

Ofte (ca. 1 gang hver 2. time)

11/03/ 2016 18 13.47. 17

Når du dyrker motion, hvor meget tid bruger du så ad gangen?

Hvad kunne få dig til at dyrke mere motion?

Går 0ver 5 rundt, 4 minutter laver gange mad osv.

Mindre end 30 min.

At jeg fik tid til at melde mig Musiker ind i et fitnesscent er

sidder i 0ver 5 min 3 minutter vinduesk gange arm

Mere end 90 min.

dyrker allerede nok

Mere end 90 min.

Bruger af Flere timer Tumblr, i døgnet netflix og youtube

Ryger, 4-5 2 spiser en minutter gange snack

Jeg er rigtig doven

Hvor ser du dig selv?

afslapp er

104


11/03/ 2016 17 13.47. 23

Går tur med hund, går fra rum til 0ver 5 rum, 3 minutter snakker gange med forældre og venner

Kvin 2-3 timer de

Altid (ca. 1 gang i timen)

11/03/ 2016 17 13.47. 46

Man 2-3 timer d

Nogle gange (ca. 1 gang hver 3. time)

11/03/ 2016 18 13.47. 49

Sjælden Jeg t (ca. 1 Man 6 timer 2-3 Skide Sjælde dyrker gang d eller mere minutter eller tisse nt ikke hver 4. motion time)

11/03/ 2016 17 13.48. 06

Altid Man 6 timer (ca. 1 d eller mere gang i timen)

Henter vand, 4-5 laver 3 minutter mad eller gange går på toilettet

61-90 min.

Gamer

11/03/ 2016 19 13.48. 54

Kvin 2-3 timer de

Altid (ca. 1 gang i timen)

går med 4-5 3 min hund minutter gange osv

31-60 min.

Fjernsy nsfreak

Kvin 2-3 timer de

Altid (ca. 1 gang i timen)

Ryger, kvalitetsti Jeg 0ver 5 d, henter Sjælde dyrker minutter et glas nt ikke vand eller motion andet

Er for doven, især fordi Godt vejr det er vinter

Går lidt rundt, 2-3 tager minutter noget at drikke osv.

Hvis jeg tog mig lidt mere For at sammen, holde men jeg er mig i egentlig form, meget Gamer komme tilfreds af med med den aggressi mængde oner motion, som jeg nu dyrker.

11/03/ 2016 18 13.49. 00

11/03/ 2016 19 13.50. 00

Man 4-5 timer d

Nogle gange (ca. 1 gang hver 3. time)

Træner eller går 0ver 5 5 eller en tur minutter mere med min hund

3 gange

Mindre end 30 min.

Sommer

61-90 min.

Altså dyrker Fordi jeg rimelig kan lide meget i Internet det(?) og forvejen, surfer det er så ved det sundt egentlig ikke...

31-60 min.

Doven

Motivation

Facebo ok fan

Gamer

Internet surfer

105


11/03/ 2016 17 13.50. 03

11/03/ 2016 18 13.50. 06

11/03/ 2016 19 13.50. 18

11/03/ 2016 17 13.50. 41

Man 0-1 timer d

Ofte (ca. 1 gang hver 2. time)

Man 4-5 timer d

Nogle gange (ca. 1 gang hver 3. time)

Jeg har en kasse lego, og en fodbold på mit 4-5 4 værelse, minutter gange som jeg godt kan lide at fjolle rundt med

Stræker 0ver 5 benene, minutter spiser mad osv

3 gange

Den ligger mellem 61min og 61-90 lidt over min., 90min, Mere end fordi 90 min. sådan er min fodboldtr æningsti der

Hvis mine trænere lagde flere træninger ind

61-90 min.

At jeg blev lidt mere motiveret Fjernsy til at gøre nsfreak det, og at jeg ville få mere fritid

Kvin 4-5 timer de

Nogle gange (ca. 1 gang hver 3. time)

Går lidt rundt i huset. Jeg Ordner 2-3 Sjælde dyrker måske minutter nt ikke nogle motion praktiske ting og sådan.

Kvin 4-5 timer de

Nogle gange (ca. 1 gang hver 3. time)

0ver 5 Læser minutter

2 gange

61-90 min., Mere end 90 min.

en blandin g af Gamer og Fodbold spiller

Flere af ovenstå ende. Læsehe Det er st og svært at Bedre vejr, internet finde tid lidt mere surfer. og tid (i Men så motivatio forhold til spiller n. Jeg skole), jeg synes finde også heller noget jeg meget ikke, det synes er musik er helt sjovt. og det vildt er jo sjovt. også en stillesid dende aktivitet.

Fjernsy nsfreak

106


11/03/ 2016 17 13.51. 20

11/03/ 2016 18 13.57. 21

Går rundt i huset, lufter hunden, hvis det er sommer 2-3 3 går jeg minutter gange ud og laver noget i haven (spiller bold el. lign)

Kvin 2-3 timer de

Altid (ca. 1 gang i timen)

Man 4-5 timer d

Går aldrig en tur, men oftest en Sjælden form for t (ca. 1 0ver 5 styrketræ 3 gang minutter ning, gange hver 4. armbøjni time) nger, mavebøj ninger mm.

Mindre end 30 min., 3160 min.

Mindre end 30 min.

Hvis det ikke var så mørkt og koldt om vinteren, hvis jeg havde mere tid hvor der Læsehe ikke st skulles laves lektier eller lign., hvis jeg boede tættere på f.eks. et fitnesscent er Hvis det var min Mest for hobby. hjernens Hvis det skyld kunne (derfor bruges i laver jeg højere styrketræ grad til at ning hver styrke mit dag) sind og andre hobbies.

Som en der spiller rigtig meget guitar... Seriøs Guitaris t. Er også lidt gamer.

107


Appendix 5 The storyboard

108


Appendix 6 The task from Usability Tasks

Prototype interface tasks: ● task 1 - You’ve just gotten the app, and wants to get going, start exploring the app. ● task 2 - Your schedule has changed this week. You want to change the schedule for the alarm on friday. ● task 3 - You want to know more about being sedentary. ● task 4 - You want to play the game. Begin at level 1. ● task 5 - You have only completed level 1, but wants to see how many levels in total that are in the game. What do you do?

109


Appendix 7 The friday setup screen

110


Appendix 8 The screens for the participatory design.

111


Appendix 9 Theme with just icon and text

112


Appendix 10 Medieval Theme:

113


Appendix 11 Medal Theme:

114


Appendix 12 Detective Theme:

115


Appendix 13 The High-Fidelity Prototype questionnaire

116


117


Results: How well would How well How well How well you rate would you would you would you your rate your rate your rate your experienc experience experience experience e of the of the of the of the Level Read Tidsstempe Introductio Main Select More l n screens? Menu? screen? screen?

How well would you How rate your How well own level exciting would of was your you motivation experience rate throughou with the the t the game? story? game?

How well would you rate the content of the Read More screen?

02/05/2016 15.15.49

4

5

5

2

4

4

5

3

02/05/2016 15.44.10

4

5

5

3

4

4

5

2

02/05/2016 16.12.08

4

5

5

3

4

5

5

4

03/05/2016 11.59.08

5

3

3

2

5

2

5

3

03/05/2016 12.23.27

4

5

5

4

4

3

5

2

03/05/2016 13.29.50

5

4

5

4

3

2

3

3

03/05/2016 13.48.48

2

3

4

4

4

3

5

03/05/2016 14.09.11

4

3

5

2

4

4

3

1

03/05/2016 14.46.16

4

5

5

5

5

4

5

5

03/05/2016 15.13.08

5

5

5

4

5

4

5

3

4,1

4,3

4,7

3,3

4,2

3,5

4,6

2,6

118


Appendix 14 The semi structured interview Tasks: 1. Try the app. Done when reached the main menu. 2. You want to play the game. Done when clicked level 1. 3. You play level 1. Done when the level is over. 4. You want to know more about sedentary behaviour. Done when explored the Read More screen. 5. You have only completed level 1, but wants to see how many levels there are in total. Done when explored Level Select screen. After each task, we ask how they felt about it.

119


Appendix 15 The emotion observation sheet: for usability test 2

Results for usability test 2:

120


121


Appendix 16 Error and comments observations sheet for usability test 2

Observation Sheet

122


Appendix 17 The test procedure for usability test 2

Test Procedure: Follow this test procedure carefully during the test. Blue text in italics should be said word by word as it is written. The evaluation is divided in three main parts: 1. Before Test a. Consent form b. Placing pictures c. Set up camera d. Give them phone 2. During Test a. Sit for 1 minute b. Start game c. Observation 3. After Test a. Questionnaire b. Interview c. End test Things to bring: 3 pictures Tape Camera Test phone Own phone for sending notification Tape Measure Printed documents

123


Before test

1. Introduction The facilitator say: “Thank you for participating in this test. You will be using an android smartphone which includes our app. The purpose of the app is to help you take breaks from sitting down too much. Sitting down too much can have big consequences for your health and breaking the sitting time can be very beneficial towards your health. By breaking we mean that you have to do something physical, like standing up or walking around. After the test is done we will ask you to fill out a questionnaire and afterwards ask you some questions regarding your experience. I will also be observing while you play the game, only to see if there are any problems with our app. I will also be there to help, but only if it is completely necessary. Else i would like you to pretend that i’m not here during the test”

2. Consent form: Hand the participant the consent form that he/she is to fill out in order to participate.

The facilitator say: “Before we start the testing, is it okay that I set up the pictures and the camera while you read through and sign this consent form?”

3. Place pictures & set up camera: While the participant is reading and signing the consent form you should put up the pictures with a distance of 3 meters between the different pictures. The height should be at the participant's chest. All pictures should be in the same room. The facilitator say: “These pictures are here as placeholders, which means that the pictures could be a picture that you actually want to have in your home” Camera: You should also set up the camera while they are reading the consent form. Every participant must be recorded with a camera that is set in a fixed spot. The camera will start recording once the break begins. Stop the camera once the break has ended and the participant is done being tested.

4. Give them phone: Hand the participant the phone and explain what is going to happen. The facilitator say: “This is the phone you will use for the test. During the test, feel free to use the phone as if it was your own.

124


In this test you should imagine that this is a normal day, where you are watching television. When you get a notification you will pick up the phone and open the Crime Investigator app. When you are done taking the break please tell me. The test will begin when you are ready.”

During test 5. Start camera and let participant sit for 1 minute: Firstly make sure to turn on the camera and put it to record. Let the participant sit however they normally would for 1 minute and then send them a notification. “You will get a notification as a SMS. When the notification appear, you will have to close it and open the app called Crime Investigator.”

6. Start game: The notification message that you send to the used phone will say “Hello Detective! There’s been a murder, we need your help!”.

7. Observation during testing: The facilitator will be standing somewhere undisturbing while taking notes. He will follow the observation sheet. If the participant at one point needs help to continue, write down where the help was given and how you helped. This is needed for the bias section.

After Test

8. Questionnaire after playing: Make sure to stop the camera when the test is done. When the break is up the facilitator say: “You finished your break, and now I would like for you to fill out this questionnaire.” The participant will then be handed the questionnaire and start answering.

9. Interview: Lastly the participant will be interviewed, while the developer is recording and taking notes. Remember to start audio recording! The facilitator say: “Now I would like to ask you some questions. Is it okay that i record it with a microphone? The answers will be kept anonymous and will only be used for exam purposes.”

125


End Test: After the interview the facilitator say: “Thank you for participating, this was a big help for us!� And the test is done.

126


Appendix 18 The quantitative questionnaire for Final evaluation

127


128


129


Final Evaluation quantitative results

130


Appendix 19 The semi structured interview for final evaluation

Interview guide The purpose of this interview is to find out why they feel intrinsically motivated

Analysis Story (Game Theories) How do you feel about the story in the game? - Was it too long, boring, dull, fun, entertaining and enjoyable? - Why? Time Pressure (Game Theories) How do you feel about the time pressure? - Was it too short or did you have too much time? - Why? Freedom of choice (Intrinsic Motivation) How do you feel about exploring the different environments and being able to go back to previous areas again? - Why? - Was it good or bad to have the freedom to go wherever you wanted? Feedback (Intrinsic Motivation) How good do you feel you are at this game? - Why? Goals and Purpose (Extrinsic Motivation) How do you feel about solving the case? - Why? - Would you want to solve other cases? How do you feel about taking a break, from sitting down? - Does it make sense? - Why?

Other -

Inputs from the users. Other comments?

131


Appendix 20 Consent Form Final Evaluation

Consent Form Final Evaluation

You have been asked to participate in a research project being conducted by Medialogy Group 202. 1. You will be tested in your own home. 1. The evaluation can take up to 45 minutes. 1. You will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time. 1. Your identity will be kept confidential and only used for exam purposes. 1. The collected data including interview and questionnaire answers, observation notes and video recordings will be confidential and will not be made available to any other than us. 1. The test will be recorded on video and microphone, but only during specific time periods. 1. The group will use some recordings to make a video production, that may be used as a CV for future employers.

Please check the boxes that reflect your wishes, sign and date the form below.

132


Appendix 21 Evaluation results qualitative How do you feel about exploring How do you the different How do you feel How do you feel How good do How do you feel feel about TIMES PARTIC environments about the story in about the time you feel you are about solving taking a break, TAMP IPANT # and being able the game? pressure? at this game? the case? from sitting to go back to down? previous areas again?

16/05/ 2016

13/05/ 2016

1

I think it was okay, it was mostly there for the sake of the activity, it wasn't that deep but it was a good thing because it I think i did pretty seemed to be well, at first I supposed to be a I like that you wasn't sure that I short thing you were free to just I would really I actually didn't would find the do, so there is not look around at like to play more notice. I think right murderer, many things you things like I said of the game, the amount of but when I need to think before, it was becuase I time was good, looked at the about, it was very fun to look thought it was the time it took things after interesting and around the 3D fun I guess, it to figure it out looking at the fun, I liked that models, the liked the little was okay. suspects I think it you could look freedom was a thing. was pretty clear around in the good thing. to me, so i think i different senarios, did good. as with the knife, you couldn't see it if you were just looking as a flat picture, you had to tilt your phone and look from above to see it.

I think it was nice to stand up, you do feel that it was probably a good thing that you did it. It makes sense to take a break like this. Well is is healthier to stand up so it is probably a good thing.

2

i think the story was good and i wanted to play and finish the game, it there was a little was build good. bit press, but i I dont think it was think i had 20 too long at all, for seconds when i me it could have stop. I dont the been a little time was to longer and i think short it was very fun. or to long. The I think it more time was because a like perfect. stories about criminals It was reminase biuld in so short time.

I think it was nice and it was more like a reality, when you had to move from place to place, thing you should do if you are a real investigator. It make it more interesting and fun. I dind't go back to find everything, i did go back to read the things i found

Before it started It told me about what to do and its important that we get a breack from sitting down and it better for human to move around. Yes i does, but i have not read about what it will do, what healthy about stading and walk, i dont know if it healthy

it was nice, but i was not 100 I feel i was good, procent sure because i got it that it was right and i make t her, i was 99 % he connection but i still thought right and think it it could be was good. wrong, Because of the but when i cigaret and the guess it right, i lipstik and was not happy exspecially the but satisfied. lipstik and just Yeah i would, if how the person it was different look from the other. and the But yes i would background of and also the person. that(increased difficulty)

133


again.

13/05/ 2016

3

I think it was quite exiting espcieally when you are sitting and watching television. I kinda lame theme in the television, then you acutally have to do something active and i think it was quite exiting. Maybe i think it was a little bit to short. There could have been more sceens. i figured it out quite fast. It could have been more exiting, with some more murder scenes.

I actually didn't notice it in the beginning. But then at last when i looked at the three suspects, then i notice it was counting down and then i got a little pressured. I actually thought i had all the time. I think is was quite all right because i spent a lot of time walking past those two scenes and then i was going back to the suspects. I think i had 3040 secinds left, when i came back.

It was quite alright. The boxes in the bottom i notice when i pushed the item in the last picture, then i realized i was marked and it was finish. Then i could go back because the other was not marked. It was a good thing for me, that i could walk. I didn't think i was guided to much, but when i thought i had look all over the first picture, then i realized, that i needed to push. I so the cigeret and push it and then infomation came up. But i didn't knew i was going to push the. Before i went back, after the second picture. It made it more freely, and i think it was quite alright

enough to walk 5 minutes. (Ask for knowing for abut it) Yeah. (Ask if didn't notice in the screen) i just wanted to play the game and i did notice but i never read the info when i enter a game.

I think i could have been better time wise. If i noticed it i think i would hurry up, but i think i did quite alright. If it was an app on my on phone and then i saw that okay you got this score 100 and the max was 500 i would try again. But then i would then know where to push. I think in park i saw two things in the back and zoom in and then notice something behind the hill. I didn't recognize it from the beginning, when i just looked. It was quite good catch by my own eye.

I think i would have been, not embarresd, but to myself i have high expectation and then it think i got the murder now and i push and it says it was correct i was happy. I am a bad loser. Quite competative. I don't know if it was too easy, but i saw the lipstick and then look at the three murderes, i started look at the hands, for the patrol or cigaret stain and then i look at the lips and then i saw the lipstick and think that it might be her. (Did you notice something on the hands) They were quite pale on top of their hands. So it wasn't a clue i could use. I didn't notice the nail polish. I would play it again to find the nail polish.

I think it was quite fun and i think it could have been awesome if you had four scenes and four cases and try them using your own picutre. Different kind of levels. I actually didn't notice that i took a break, because it was kind like a game. My thoughts weren't connected to the tv and i wasn't thinking about having a break, because i did something else than wathcing tv. I dont know if i am lazy, but i think it was nice to having a break, that didn't felt like a break. I was quite up tempo, andrenalin and it was quite exiting.

134


13/05/ 2016

17/05/ 2016

4

5

I was alright. It was kind of obivous, but not boring.

Den var realistisk. Engagerende at det kun var fem minutter. Kort og godt, nemt at forstå.

17/05/ 2016

7

Det var lidt underligt til at starte med, fordi jeg ikke helt vidste hvad jeg skulle, men da jeg så kom i gang med historien gav det meget mere mening for mig. Meget relevant og interessant, den måde det var bygget op. Rigtig godt.

17/05/ 2016

8

Det var meget simpelt, men ikke for simpelt. Meget

It didn't affect me very much.

That's is something i do It was kind a It was pretty very often and unique i think easy. it's kind of nice Above averaage. and pretty And from time actually. (Got a good time interesting. to time yes, but It feels healthy. and (Was it good to not for hours a (Maybe you will correct answer) have freedom day. use this app, if Yeah were to go to) It would be a needed a yeah good thing. break) Yeah. Yeah sure

Bidrog til historien. Passende tid.

Interessant. Genbruge Da man Meget godt billederne. Ja, begyndte at finde emne. men ikke hver So you could ledetrådende Billederne dag. discover again. begyndte det at repræsenterer Nogen dage Good idea. være rimelig forskellige ikke. Nogen Adjusting to simpelt. scener og så er dage ja. camera, very Læbestiften der ledetråde i Flere levels, quick. gjorde at han dem. Yes, very stigende fandt det. interesting. sværhedsgrad, forskelligt slags gameplay.

Jeg skulle skynde mig lidt. Da jeg så at der var 40 sekunder igen, så tænkte jeg ”når jeg det her?”, fordi jeg troede at man også skulle nå noget, efter man sluttede. Jeg kiggede ikke særlig meget på tiden. Hver gang jeg skiftede billede, så jeg lige på tiden. 5 minutter var rimelig længe, fandt jeg ud af.

Godt lavet, at man rent faktisk skal gå frem og tilbage i stedet for. Det blev nemmere for mig, at jeg først kiggede i skoven. Jeg synes det var nemmere, at man selv fik lov til at vælge.

Det var meget Det var ret sjovt, fint med en det var ikke så timer, men jeg stationært. Man

Det var ikke super udfordrende for mig. Måske fordi jeg har set mange krimiserier. Da jeg så læbestiften, fandt jeg ud af at morderen nok havde læbestift på. Også da jeg læste at kniven lugtede af alkohol, fordi jeg var rimelig sikker på at hun havde en flaske i hånden.

Jeg skulle lige vende mig til styringen, men

Jeg vil ikke sige, at det har en super stor effekt, men man får alligevel sådan et skub til at man KAN finde ud af noget. At der er noget ved at lave noget i 5 minutter. Jeg ville gerne have Det ville helt klaret flere sikkert give cases. Det mening for mig skulle blive at have en 5sværere og minutters sværere og aktivitet. Jeg sværere, hvis tror en måned jeg skulle spille ville være det dag-for-dag. meget Hvis jeg havde realistisk. ligget længe i min seng, så ville jeg helt sikkert stå op og spille det. Hvis jeg var i gang med et spil, tror jeg ikke at jeg bare ville afbryde det, for at klare en case med det samme. Det altid fedt at vinde kan man sige. Når man

Sværhedsgrad en skulle forøges. Det

135


overkommeligt. følte ikke at jeg Det virkede meget var under stress struktureret. på noget tidspunkt. Det gav mig følelsen at jeg havde styr på det, fordi jeg var på sporet rimelig tidligt i spillet.

17/05/ 2016

18/05/ 2016

9

10

Fine description of the persons. Middel level of interest.

Det er jo en typisk mordhistorie. Den var nem, kort og præcis. Det var nemt at sætte sig ind i. Så kunne man hurtigt komme videre og begynde. Det kunne godt være irriterende hvis det var en lang historie med unødvendige personer.

Didn’t feel pressured by time until the end. Liked the time.

Da den kom ned på 100 sekunder, uden at jeg havde klaret nogle af objectivesne. Det gav da lidt pres og fik blodet til at pumpe rundt i kroppen og gav lidt pres, så man tog sig lidt mere sammen.

følte sig mere integreret. Det var rart at kunne gå tilbage til billederne. Inden at jeg sluttede spillet, gik jeg lige tilbage på et af billederne for at være sikker.

fandt hurtigt ud af at jeg kunne gå tættere på. Det var sjovt, da jeg fandt ud af hvordan man gjorde. Da jeg fandt læbestiften. Først så jeg de mistænkte og så da jeg så cigarret skodet med læbestift på kunne jeg regne ud, at det var hende med læbestift.

Fun to find Yes after some things. Didn’t time. When notice the check heard the boxes. number 38.

Det var meget sjovt. Det er sådan lidt virtual reality agtigt, på den made at man skal bevæge sig rundt. Først gik jeg hen til de to crime-scenes og derefter hen til de mistænkte og så tilbage til skoven, for at se den røde læbestift, for at se hvem den passede på.

Jeg synes ikke det var så svært. Man fandt hurtigt ud af at man kunne gå hen eller pege forskellige steder hen i scenerne. Og så kunne man trykke på de objekter der lå rundt omkring, så det var meget nemt med styringen. Da jeg først havde set alle tingene, og så derefter kiggede på de mistænkte og så lagde jeg mærke til det med læbestiften. Men på den anden side var jeg slet ikke sikker, det kunne sagtens have været at jeg havde set en forkert farve eller noget. Men så gik jeg jo bare tilbage til billedet og kiggede en ekstra gang.

vinder vil man bare fortsætte.

skulle blive mere udfordrende.

Confirmed that I had done it correct. Nice if it becomes harder in later levels.

Yes, I could see myself doing this.

Det er helt klart fedt at have et mål, i forhold til at jeg skulle klare et eller andet ligegyldigt. Ja gerne. Jeg synes dette level var passende til en tutorial. Hvis jeg skulle blive ved med at spille det, skulle der nok være nogle flere levels, måske nogle point man kunne optjene ift. tidsbegrænsnin gen. Og samtidig med at det blev sværere.

Ja, det vil det helt sikkert. Jeg synes det er en god idé det med at komme rundt og stå op. Det er faktisk rart lige at fokusere på noget helt andet, bare sætte sig ind i en case, og komme væk fra virkeligheden. Jeg kunne også se mig selv gøre det i et frikvarter eller lign. Flere forskellige niveauer og baner. For at jeg skulle spille det hver dag, skulle der måske være minuspoint, hvis jeg missede en dag. Måske havde man nogle point som detektiv som min egen profil.

136


Appendix 22 Any reference for appendix 22, look in the Sketchbook.

137

Crime Investigations P2  
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you