Improvements on Alpha


Test Subjects

For this final session the test subject was a medical student at McGill with experience and training in the field of physiotherapy.

Despite not explictly fitting the personas outlined in the initial project proposal, the subject was chosen to provide advice and comment to some degree on the viability of Spotty as rehabilitation tool.

In addition to this, the team would like to acknowledge that throughout the course of the testing sessions and interaction with test subjects across a wide mobility range, that age is hardly a determining factor for candidacy and that is largely dependent on familiarity with technology and initial motor ability.







Summary of Observations

As far as interface design was concerned, the suggestions provided by the PT were only aesthetic.

Strengths
  • The overall navigation of the interface, irrespective of gameplay was easy and straightforward.
  • User had no issues playing the game, including improving their score with repeated attempts (expected given lack of impairment).
  • The user remarked that Spotty showed promise in improving hand-eye coordination and motor control through continued gameplay.
Weaknesses
  • The game timer was not visible enough to the user and they were unaware of it initially.
  • Through their expertise, the user highlighted the importance of orientation and placement of the device as to best maximize benefits, with effort being largely coorelated with effectiveness.
Comparison with Previous Test Results

The results reflect the continued improvement of the interface, with none of the issues previously tackled making a reappearance and the increasing focus on smaller details indicative of overall progress.

The most beneficial and rewarding remarks from this session were those regarding overall effacy and rehabilitative potential of the game.


Improvements On Alpha

Based on Group 2's testing
  1. We recommend to rename previous score to level high score and store the highest score achieved in the current level.
    • We have successfully implemented the this feature that each level stores the highest score achieved, and the level clear page display both the highest score and the currently achieved score. Also, the user had no problem in understanding on this feature.
  2. We recommend to show on the tutorial video the score increasing as the dog gets closer to the bone and reduce it when it touches the wall.
    • Since we have implemented different scoring system, suggested by our TA Dalia, this attribute does not correspond to our product anymore. However, the tutorial animation does clearly show the score decrement by touching and staying in the boundary of the path.
  3. We believe boundaries should be implemented around the dog’s path. The user would lose points when the dog collides with the path’s boundary.
    • This attribute was successfully implemented in our system that if the dog touches the boundary, the score is deducted by 5 first, and if the dog still stays in contact with the boundary, the score is deducted by 10 per second. The scoring mechanism functioned perfectly, while the tester was playing with our product.
  4. We believe it would be better to remove the quit label because you cannot quit an application from within under any iOS. Currently, the quit label is confusing and may be in the wrong position if the ipad is flipped.
    • Since we have decided to lock the screen orientation to prevent the label from pointing wrong side of the device, the user was forced to re-orient the hardware to place the screen in right direction. But, she did not have trouble on doing this.
  5. It would be better if the level ends as soon as the dog collides with the bone.
    • This aspect was also successfully implemented that when the tester hits the dog with the bone, the game play is stopped and level clear page is displayed automatically. So, the feature was intrusive enough to prevent the user from keeping playing the game after winning the game.
  6. We recommend to give more feedback when the user loses or gains points. Every time the user gains points, a label would show +10 and when the user loses points it would show -10. The positive points could be green and the negative points could be red. When the dog reaches the bone, the points obtained by the extra time should be shown on the points label and added to the total score.
    • Except the score increase indicator (due to the change in scoring mechanism), this attribute was also successfully installed that the user was able to notice what happened to the score as soon as she hit the boundary of path.
Aesthetics

Based both on feedback from the test session, personal experience and remarks from the TA.

  1. The game time label was modified that the size was changed to be bigger and the style was changed to the bold. After the testing, the tester mentioned that the timer label was not noticeable and the system failed to alert her the short in game time. Therefore, the size and style of the time label were changed to be more visible to the users.
  2. The button label was changed to the button image to distinguish them from the non-interactive labels. According to our TA, Dalia, it was hard to distinguish the buttons from the normal indicative labels, so it was possible to confuse the users in interacting with the interface. Therefore, our team modified the interactive button to be more like ‘button’ by adding shape and image, and now they are noticeably different from the non-interactive labels.
Mechanics

The ‘anti-cheating’ feature was implemented in our product. Our team realized that the users were still able to win the game, even though they did not follow the path we have set, just cut through the wall of the boundary, and reached to the bone directly. We considered this as a bug and decided to add the attribute that prevent the users from doing such ‘cheating’ because it violates the purpose of our product.

Our team could simply implement the ‘wall’ feature that physically blocks the movement of the dog so that the users cannot move the dog beyond the boundary. However, our team agreed not to use this feature because the ‘physical wall’ can support the users’ movement that users just can drag the dog to whatever the direction it allows. Although the scoring mechanism penalize it by deducting the score, we agreed that it will interrupt and will not allow users’ voluntary movements. Therefore, we added ‘anti-cheating’ feature that allows the users to move beyond the boundary, yet fails the game when the users does not follow the path as given.

Further Development

In addition to the implementations above, the team also identified potential improvements for further development.

  1. Porting Spotty to a larger touchscreen display for institutions so that patients can benefit more from a wider range of motion utilizing different muscle groups.
  2. Additional challenges:
    • Moving obstacles.
    • Varying the width of the track to adjust difficulty.
    • Re-introducing the multi-finger game mode.
  3. Transmit metrics to physiotherapists to track progress of their patients.
  4. Add auditory feedback.
  5. Work with experts to build optimum and compelling levels that are tailored to target left-or-right sides of the body accordingly.

User Manual

The manual has been updated from the previous version (changes highlighted in red) based on feedback and suggestions from the TA.

Final version.


Summary of Contributions
Mohamed Radhika Chan Woo
Development - - 4
Alpha System Testing - 1 0.5
Persona Commentary 0.5 - -
Summary of Test Observations 0.5 - 1
Comparison with Previous Test Results 1 - 1
Improvements on Alpha - - 0.5
Further Improvements 0.5 - -
User Manual - - 2
Presentation 4 1 1
Web Notebook 3.5 - -
Total 10 2 10