MGMLaboratory
Back

Menu

01Home
02About Us
03Projects
04Publications
05Member
06Articles
07Contact

Let's Talk

Open in Mail app

Socials

Malang (ID) --:--Privacy PolicyTerms of Service

January 1, 20192 min read

User Journey Maps Show Why AR Navigation Fails PedestriansUser Journey Maps Show Why AR Navigation Fails Pedestrians

Ten walkers, two search tasks and one chart of frustrations produced a bus finder that cut travel time by roughly two thirds.

  • Journal
  • Publications

Written by

  • SRShirasaka RenIT & Infrastructure · Student Member

In this article

  1. 01Watching ten people get lost
  2. 02What the prototype changed

A pedestrian hunting for a bus stop is not driving. There is no lane to follow and no turn coming up. The person stands on a pavement, turns in a circle, and tries to line up a phone screen with the street in front of them. That mismatch is where location based AR usually stumbles.

In car navigation assumes a road to follow. Photo: bizmac, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Fig. 01In car navigation assumes a road to follow. Photo: bizmac, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

01/02

Watching ten people get lost

The authors ran a field study with ten university students aged 20 to 28. All used Android phones, and none knew the test area. Each participant completed two tasks. In blind search the app named a random destination about 300 metres away. In directed search the participant picked a place from the map. Every step was recorded.

Those records became a user journey map. Along the top sits the sequence of steps a user takes. Down the side sit five rows: actions, questions, happy moments, pain points and opportunities. The last two rows are where the software requirements come from.

  • Markers overlap when two or more points of interest sit in the same direction on screen.
  • The screen gives no clue about how to walk to a point.
  • A destination hidden behind another building is nearly impossible to find.
  • Users cannot tell how far they still have to walk.
A bus stop sign and shelter on a city street. Photo: JustYou80, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Fig. 02

02/02

What the prototype changed

The team built an AR app for the bus network of Zhongli District in Taiwan and rebuilt the presentation around one rule: do not show everything at once. Only the next waypoint and the final target appear. When two markers line up, the farther one is hidden. A marker changes shape once the user is within 20 metres of the destination.

A 360 degree view of an indoor space. Photo: Szilas, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Fig. 03A 360 degree view of an indoor space. Photo: Szilas, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Ten participants then repeated both tasks on the prototype and on a standard location based AR app. Both scored 100 percent success, so accuracy was never the issue. Time was. Blind search fell from 14.9 minutes to 5.4, and directed search from 7.86 to 5.12. Questionnaire scores for satisfaction and learnability climbed by roughly 15 to 25 points.

One complaint survived the redesign. Several users reported drift, where a marker floats slightly away from the real object. That is a sensor and GPS limit rather than an interface one, and the authors note that more precise coordinates would be needed to fix it.

Source

  1. Brata, K. C., & Liang, D. (2019). An effective approach to develop location-based augmented reality information support. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering.

    DOI10.11591/ijece.v9i4.pp3060-3068 (opens in a new tab)

Next articleWhy Language Apps Avoid Speaking Practice(Keep scrolling)(Read it next)(Loading)
A bus stop sign and shelter on a city street. Photo: JustYou80, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.