For Spring 2024 at Cornell Tech, the theme of our INFO 5305 (User Experience and User Research) class that semester was ‘neurodivergence.’ My homework partner and I chose to focus our semester-long class project on sensory overload, which is the overstimulation of one or more of the senses. Sensory overload most commonly affects autistic people and people with ADHD, and can markedly cause a great deal of distress to the individual. As such, we sought to create a product that could help alleviate the overwhelming anxiety and discomfort generated by sensory overload.
February 2024 - May 2024
UI/UX Designer, UX Researcher
Figma, Google Suite, Zoom
Sharon Lin, Nandini Proothi
1. Create product concept
2. Interview individuals who experience sensory overstimulation
3. Begin qualitative coding using interview transcripts
4. Consolidate findings into Affinity Diagram
5. Uncover themes from user research
6. Devise a list of requirements for the product
7. Create personas and storyboards of envisioned usages for the product
8. Develop a medium-fidelity prototype
9. Receive heuristic evaluation on medium-fidelity prototype
10. Incorporate feedback to develop high-fidelity prototype
11. Create a rigorous evaluation protocol
Canary is an IoT product that combines a traditional phone application with a tactile object to assist neurodivergent users when they’re experiencing sensory overload. Some neurodivergent individuals may experience overstimulation when encountering loud noises, pungent smells, bright lights, or other environmental factors. This overstimulation can lead to intense anxiety and significant distress. Canary is designed to walk users through calming, meditative exercises in conjunction with the tactile elements presented by the accompanying Canary Ball, which includes various materials and textures to soothe the user. The app also offers avenues for users to distract themselves using mini-games and visual stimulation. The app's intuitive interface allows easy navigation, especially during distress. Customizable sensory profiles allow users to tailor their sensory preferences based on specific scenarios.
To understand neurodivergent individuals’ experiences with sensory overload — as well as their current self-soothing strategies when encountering it — we conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with 6 participants who identified as autistic or ADHD. After standard demographics questions, we asked participants about their experiences with sensory overload, their experiences with stimming (the repetition of physical actions, sounds, or other behaviors to help cope with emotions), whether they sought external help during overstimulation, and the technological interventions they used to self-soothe.
Using the transcripts of our interviews, we began to qualitatively code our interviews in Google Sheets. This allowed us to quickly extract the core findings from our research.
Gathering all our qualitative codes, we placed them all in a Miro board and began separating them into general themes. These themes included:
• Neurodivergent experiences
• Technological interventions
• Audio sensory overload
• Visual sensory overload
• Olfactory sensory overload
• Tactile sensory overload
• Experience of sensory overload in a private setting
• Experience of sensory overload in a public setting
• Stimming
• Calming down while overstimulated
• Distracting while overstimulated
The qualitative analysis helped us recognize the pain points participants faced when experiencing sensory overload. Interestingly, not all participants resorted to stimming in their past experiences of sensory overload. While some of them found themselves stimming unconsciously, others stated that it did more harm than good. When experiencing sensory overload in different settings, some participants were keen on calming themselves down, but others chose to distract themselves. Our research told us that sensory overload was triggered by different environmental factors in public versus private settings. Additionally, participants’ methods of coping with overstimulation differed based on these setting differences due to fear of public perception and stigmatization.
Given the emerging themes of our user interviews, we came up with 8 design requirements for our product.
Our interview participants naturally ended up separating themselves into two different categories: those who chose to calm themselves when overstimulated, and those who chose to distract themselves when overstimulated. Those who chose to calm themselves would often wear noise canceling headphones, read articles, or listen to long form videos. Those who chose to distract themselves would often play games on their phones or fidget with an easily accessible object. Our aim with this project was to help as many users as possible when they experienced sensory overload. As such, our product had to offer different features catered to those who chose to distract themselves or calm themselves when overstimulated.
To understand how and why individuals would use our products, we created three storyboards to illustrate ecological, interactive, and emotional design perspectives for our product.
We promptly set to working on a medium-fidelity prototype. This was a “T” prototype, meaning that we showed a breadth of features for our product in a superficial way, then did a deeper dive into functionality for some key features.
Having completed our medium fidelity prototype, we exchanged our work with another group’s medium-fidelity prototype to perform a heuristic evaluation on each other’s work. The numbers next to the violation indicate the level of severity for the violation, with 1 being low severity and 5 being very severe.
Their heuristic evaluation of our application, as well as our proposed fixes for the violations, were as such:
To test the efficacy of our product, we developed a rigorous evaluation protocol to test on users.
• Task completion: Are the users able to navigate through the application without the need for additional information?
• Speed: This will only be measured when they are navigating to a certain feature i.e., how long did it take them to go to meditation mode or games mode?
• Emotional reaction: Depending on the ease of the use of the app, and the activities involved in the app, how does the user feel after using certain features? (Example: “It took too long to open connect to the music service and it made me feel frustrated.” This will be self-reported by the user.
1. What is your age?
2. Which gender do you identify with?
3. How do you identify in terms of ethnicity (Hispanic or non-Hispanic)?
4. How do you identify in terms of race?
5. What is the highest level of education you have completed?
6. Have you experienced sensory overload in the past?
7. Have you used any technologies to distract or calm yourself down while experiencing sensory overload in the past?
a. If so, which ones?
• For most tasks, we want the users to navigate to each mode in roughly 30 seconds. If they are unable to do that, we want to take input from them and redesign the app in a way that each mode (games, meditation, etc) is accessible from the home screen. Our rationale is that when users are experiencing sensory overload, they would want to quickly launch the app and use a feature.
• How we will collect this data: The tasks will be timed.
• Our goal is to have the user feel calm after using any feature on the app. If the user feels overstimulated, frustrated, or angry while using the app, we want to take their feedback and redesign the features.
• How we will collect this data: This will be self-reported by the user.
• We want the users to be able to navigate through the app without any additional help or information.
• How we will collect this data: We will be noting down their ability to complete the task without any errors or additional information as they are completing the tasks.
1. How would you describe your experience using Canary?
2. How easy or difficult was it to learn how to use Canary?
3. How easy or difficult did you find the tasks to be for you?
4. On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being not at all efficient and 5 being very efficient), how efficiently did you feel you were able to complete the tasks?
5. Did the use of Canary leave you feeling calmer than before using the app?
6. Would you use Canary again?
• Do you have any questions?
• Is there anything else you would like to share with us?
This project was a rather thorough walkthrough of traditional UX research methods in a relatively short period of time. I discovered that I quite enjoy conducting semi-structured interviews, especially when I get to probe into some answers to gain deeper insight into the participants’ rationale. While the process of qualitative coding can be grueling (especially when it comes to correcting machine-automated transcripts), I found it to be an incredibly helpful method for compiling our findings and uncovering what tied them all together.
If I were to continue with this project, I would recruit at least 16 neurodivergent participants to test our product. I would then work on the next set of iterations for Canary based on the feedback.