TAPO.png

TAPO Interactive Experience

TAPO Interactive Experience
Transforming Attitudes, Polices, and Organizations

Graduate Student Services Research Fellowship Award, IQE Pitch Winner, DAAP cares finalist

Designing an Interactive Experience to facilitate conversations, create empathy, change attitudes on race and motivate users to take action by providing learning prompts, questions and activities.

  • Master’s Thesis, Design Research, Social Impact

  • Master Student: Nichole Chaney; Committee Chair: Ashley Kubley; Committee Member: Tia Sheree Gaynor; Committee Member: Matt Wizinsky

  • Miro, Figma, Zoom, Google Sheets

TAPO_fistbump_2.jpg

Background

2 Mpatapo.jpg
5 Interdisciplinary.png
 

WHY

Why don’t we talk about race?

  • White supremacy and white privilege

  • Fear and emotional discomfort

  • Color-blind ideology

  • Implicit bias

  • Systemic racism


 

HOW

How do we overcome racial obstacles according to research?

  • Conversations

  • Interracial contact

  • Data and facts related to race

  • Counter narratives

  • The creation of brave spaces

These practices lead to transformation at an individual and systemic level.


 

WHAT

What are the advantages of having these conversations online?

  • Safely socially distancing during the pandemic

  • Bridging long distances

  • A comfortable environment

  • Gamification


10 benchmarks.png
10 benchmarks-1.png
 

DESIGN OPPORTUNITY

Provide meaningful content to facilitate conversations in an engaging interactive format

12 objectives.png
Quantitative.png
 

PRIMARY RESEARCH

8 expert interviews

  • Vice President of Equity, Inclusion & Community

  • EdD, CDP, Diversity and Inclusion Leader

  • Executive Director of Equal Opportunity and Access

  • Director Equitable Strategies

  • Assistant Professor of Political Science

  • Senior Director of Marketing and Communication at a non-profit

  • Executive, Global Technical Capability Development Leader

  • Diversity and Inclusion Trainer

interview insights (1).jpg

PLANNING MODULES / LEVEL / CONTENT

The content was built based on Critical Race Theory (CRT) and topics in racial equity with co-participation in Miro from committee members and experts.

Frame 10.png

METHODOLOGY

24 Design Strategy.png

 

PRELIMINARY TESTS

3 preliminary tests were conducted before participant testing to:

  • determine the average time needed to complete the experience

  • test the functionality of the interface

  • test the content and dialogue questions

  • narrow down the audience

17 preliminary participants.png

PRELIMINARY TEST INTERFACE

  • For 3–4 players

  • 7 timed modules

  • board & cards

  • pull-down instructions

  • feeling wheel

16 preliminary test 3.png
17 preliminary participants.png
Preliminary Test: The pull-out drawer with questions was confusing to users.

Preliminary Test: The pull-out drawer with questions was confusing to users.

PRELIMINARY TEST INSIGHTS

Insights:

  • Time limits, relationships, and knowledge of racial topics can foster in-depth conversation or hinder it

  • This insight determined the audience

The following revisions were made to the preliminary interface to develop interface A and B:

  • Clicks were reduced

  • Board and cards were streamlined

  • Pull-down (drawer) menus were removed

  • Progress bar was added at the top

  • Fact cards were removed because of redundancy

  • Feeling wheel was replaced with the Geneva Emotion Wheel


PARTICIPANT TESTS: INTERFACE A & B

19 preliminary demographics.png
9 critical theory.png
3 TAPO (2).png
 

For 3–4 players
7 timed modules

  • board & cards

  • better graphics

  • more streamlined

  • self-guided

  • alarm notifications added

  • Geneva Emotion Wheel

21 interface A 3.png
Interface A test.png
Interface A: Showing how the board and cards work  with 4 participants.

Interface A: Showing how the board and cards work with 4 participants.


I wanted to test a simplified interface that featured a spinning wheel versus a game board and cards. I wanted to know if the spin wheel with 6 modules would take less time and would be easier to navigate; therefore, Interface B was developed. A and B testing was done to try and find out which interface was better according to participants.

Interface B:

To take interface B for a test ride click here.

For 3–4 players
6 timed modules

  • spin wheel

  • participant markers

  • self-guided

23 interface B 4.jpg
Interface B test.jpg
Interface B: Showing the wheel function.

Interface B: Showing the wheel function.


RESULTS

25 ind results.jpg
27 interface feedback.jpg
26 by race.jpg
28 beneficial.jpg
29 beneficial positive.jpg
30 empathy.jpg
31 empathy positive feedback.jpg
32 sharing.jpg

DISCUSSION

Interactive Experience Guidelines

General and Set-up

  • participants/groups must be diverse

  • participants must thoroughly read instructions beforehand

  • must have diverse groups (recording for testing) set up beforehand

  • leave ample time to engage in conversation (ideally no time
    limits, 2 hrs min)

  • must have engaged participants

Content

  • multiple levels of content

  • be careful of redundant content

  • videos and stories are important

  • more reminders to be open and speak to encourage participants

Technology

  • must have a working timer

  • ability to go full screen automatically

  • ability to embed content (video / help cards)

  • smart links

  • progress bar is essential

Design is finding a seat at the table in policy development, traditional non-profits, international development, social impact consulting, corporate social responsibility, social enterprise, social good think tanks, community regeneration and in advocacy and activism. Though it’s fair to say, that only a few places in the world have made Design mainstream in those spaces. It remains experimental, or at least emergent, amongst the players who see Social Change as their traditional business.

–Jethro Sercombe, Social Impact Designer

Sercombe, J. (2019). The power of Designing for Social Impact: An Intro to Social Design (or whatever it’s called.) Medium-HCD. https://medium.com/this-is-hcd/the-power-of-designing-for-social-impact-429a76110a79


 

As designers, we have to be careful with the power and influence we have to create these tools. We must not reinforce disparities, cause more harm, or reinvent the wheel on solutions that have been developed.

That is why so much time and effort was spent in reading and studying race in the United States, the obstacles that can overcome racial injustice, and how conversations can be vital to humanizing people who do not look or have the same experiences.

Frame 11.png
 
37 social impact 7.jpg

Conclusion

The interactive experience IS beneficial in facilitating conversations on race, creating empathy, and begin changing attitudes on race. However, more work and research is needed to develop a better tool and to recruit the right participants / audience.

Next Steps

  1. Further Testing with non-profits and organizations

  2. Development from Figma prototype to functional application

  3. Expand Scope

  • Small groups of individuals in organizations, non-profits, and businesses to use as part of their diversity training

  • Include more people of color in both in participatory design and testing.

  • Recruit interested participants (vs students who may not have been interested in this study) for more accurate data.