1. Prototype link (Please submit a link to a playable prototype, not a link to your design file)
2. Describe your project (Max 150 words)
To be human is to think critically. For centuries, one could argue writing and reading have been the main vehicle for human expression and exploration. Yet, with the rise of AI, this medium has begun to disappear. Instant gratification, perfectly tailored AI outputs, and calculated, robotic media has begun to dull our critical thinking skills, threatening our humanity and self-expression.
For this reason, our team was convinced to create a platform to educate the next generation of creatives, authors, and learners on AI's impact on both academia and daily life. Hone is an app that aims to preserve humanity by promoting critical analysis and easy access to credible academia. Through interactive exercises and a carefully curated selection of trusted resources and essays, we hope to challenge people to be critical of the world around them and encourage independence. In the era of artificial intelligence, we hope to preserve what it means to stay human!
3. Describe your research process and findings. If you conducted any surveys or interviews, please include the survey form and/or interview questions here. If you conducted secondary research by pulling from online sources, please include a link to your sources. (Max 500 words)
Our research process was a combination of user interviews, user surveys, personal experiences, and 2 user testers. We focused much more on iterating the designs throughout the day as more and more responses rolled in. The process entailed first engaging in four 1-to-1 interviews asking various college students to gauge their feelings on artificial intelligence, along with general information about their learning styles. We asked students how they liked studying for tests, versus learning general knowledge (about stuff they might care about more!), along with asking them what they don’t like about learning. We also asked questions about their experience with artificial intelligence, their perception of it, and how it impacts their lives. Along with these in person interviews, we also sent out a Google Form to various college clubs, in which 11 individuals answered (the link is here). This Google Form was meant as a supplement for our interview questions, helping to quantify how much the dissemination of artificial intelligence has impacted our ability to learn, consume and create media.
Our overall findings about learning styles revealed that most students rely on gamified applications (Quizlet) when studying for short term knowledge (such as cramming for an exam), however they all believe that spaced learning is more beneficial for them in the long run in retaining knowledge! As a whole, students like to specifically learn new skills through hands-on activities and quick decision making games--- which implies that this sample of college students specifically likes to repeatedly do things until they become muscle memory.
We found that 60% (9/15) of interviewees have mistaken AI generated content for something real, most media being silly videos or photos found on short-form content platforms. To compliment this number, we also found that 53% of users (8/15) regularly question whether something they read online was AI generated or not. These statistics provided confidence for us that this solution could be a possible answer in a behemoth sea of AI-generated media. It's natural to distrust the media you consume after being deceived-- professors, students and teenagers alike-- but how can we learn the difference between what's real and what's fake?
4. Describe your most important design decisions. What research findings and/or user testing results led you to make these decisions? (Max 500 words)
Our design process centralized around our mission towards critical thinking and academia. These decisions were also supplemented by our research on our users’ learning styles and general struggles with artificial intelligence.
One of our most important design decisions were the activities. Initially, we wanted the only activity in the app to be the Critical Analysis Activity, where users read an article and find AI generated sentences, or phrases that don’t pertain to the prompt or lack critical analysis (an aspect indicative of AI-generated writing). However, our research found that users struggled with identifying fabricated photos and videos online in their daily usage of social media. This became a discussion for our team, as we wanted to stay true to the “spaced-out”/slower process which entails critical analysis, not just silly photos. Ultimately, we decided that a feature teaching how to identify photos/videos would be useful perhaps for an older generation who are more susceptible to digital fabricated content. As a result, we went with two activities: a bite-sized Duolingo-esque game to identify AI generated images/videos, and a hands-on analysis-based activity where users analyze a paragraph and pick out sentences that don’t fit within the context of the prompt. It was necessary for both these activities to provide feedback on a user’s answer, as it helps the user actually learn why these differences exist, rather than use the app for the sake of entertainment.
This need for intentional learning also entailed the dark loading screens. We didn’t want them to be too slow to the point where users find it redundant, but rather, a time for them to reflect on what they had just read/learnt. It was important that the emphasis wasn’t all about the gamification but rather what knowledge the user absorbed in the process.
Another important design decision was incorporating the notebook-like feel of the app. Initially, we planned to go with a more modern aesthetic with a dark background to reflect the theme of AI integration. However, we felt that the modern aesthetic fell in line with the current-day trends involving artificial intelligence and big tech, which is not what we wanted. One specific user tester also noted the notebook style interface made their learning experience feel more interactive and personal, ultimately helping them stay engaged for longer periods. Based on this feedback, we decided to change our approach to better align with user preferences while still keeping a balance between creativity and technology.
In addition to the overall feel of the app, another key design decision was incorporating fun graphics throughout the app. During our interviews, many users mentioned Duolingo and how they mostly return to the app just to enjoy the mascot, Duo, and it's silly graphics. Inspired by this insight, we decided to introduce similar elements through friendly faces and shapes! This not only adds a touch of whimsy but also creates a more engaging and personable experience. After all, critical thinking doesn’t have to be boring. :)
Built With
- figma
Log in or sign up for Devpost to join the conversation.