Kitchen Pantry

The project aims to streamline meal planning by solving the challenge of deciding what to cook with available ingredients at home. Catering to diverse lifestyles, the goal is to transform the meal preparation experience. Through user personas, competitor analysis, and initial design concepts, the project lays the foundation for an efficient and user-centric meal planning application.

UX Team Members

• Lizet Gutierrez Lizet Gutierrez - Personas and scenarios, caveats, conclusion
• Abraham Hernandez Abraham Hernandez - introductions, executive summary
• Miguel Ocampo Paniagua Miguel Ocampo Paniagua - Research methods, findings

User-Centered Design Artifacts

• Personas and Scenarios
• Sketches and Diagrams
• Wireframes
• Prototype

Phase I: Analyzing Users, Competitors, and Initial Designs

Executive Summary

• Persona Learnings:

  • Mike Foodie: Identified a need for diverse and culturally rich recipes

  • Marcos Ortega: Uncovered a demand for healthier cooking solutions for families

  • Anthony: Recognized a gap for a user-friendly solution catering to individuals who dislike repetitive cooking and want to explore new cultures.

  • Itzel: Discovered challenges in gluten-free cooking and a desire for quick, varied meals within a tight schedule.

• Heuristic Evaluation Highlights:

  • Identified strengths and weaknesses of Supercook, highlighting areas for improvement in recipe generation progress indicators and user customization options.
  • Noted consistency variations in interface presentation.
  • Recognized Supercook's effectiveness in preventing errors but suggested more guidance for ingredient input.
  • Acknowledged the need for clearer error messages and additional help documentation.
  • Most competitors offer services behind a paywall

• Competitive Analysis:

  • Recognized gaps in competitors' solutions, emphasizing opportunities for innovation.
  • Supercook's effectiveness in recognizing ingredients but potential enhancements in customization features.

• Overall Takeaway:

  • The personas provided invaluable insights into diverse user needs and preferences.
  • Heuristic evaluation pinpointed areas for improvement, showcasing opportunities to outperform competitors.

Full phase I report

Phase II: Refining interaction and designing wireframes

Executive Summary

• Cognitive Walkthroughs

  • Putting yourself in a persona to test the application for usability
  • Personas and their walkthroughs:
    • Mike Foodie - Mike was browsing around trying to get anything to work, but left confused.
    • Marcos Ortega - Marcos starts by finding a recipe he really likes, but struggles to find how to add the ingredients to his shopping list. He gets frustrated and just goes to the store.
    • Anthony - Anthony had no issues finding what he needed.
    • Itzel - Itzel understands how the app works, but as a first time user, she just did not have much time to set up all her pantry items.

• Wireframes

  • Homepage: what a user sees when first clicking on the app
  • Shopping list: where a user can add items they need to buy
  • Meal Plan: Where a user can plan out their meals of the week
  • Recipes: where a user can find and save recipes
    • Also shows what a recipe page might look like
  • Pantry: items in a users pantry

• Overall Takeaways

  • The cognitive walkthrough provided a perspective on how different users may use the app and what to possibly fix
  • The wireframes gave us an image on what the app may look like, where to improve and where to add more details

Full phase II report

Phase III: Prototypes and User Testing

Executive Summary

• Usability Test Plan

  • Evaluate navigation, task effectiveness, and user satisfaction & gather insights on user expectations and preferences.
  • Inclusion: Cooking enthusiasts interested in new recipes, forgetful about inventory & Exclusion: Non-cookers, under 18, lack of internet or smartphone access.
  • Tasks: Navigation, pantry management, ingredient input.
  • Data Collection: Observations, completion time, errors, feedback.
  • Analysis: Identify usability issues and areas for improvement.

• Draft Protocol

  • Welcome participants, explain purpose, and encourage think-aloud.
  • Tasks: Adding Ingredients, Finding a Recipe, Saving a Recipe, Navigating to Meal Plans, Quick Meal Suggestions, Adding Expiration Dates
  • Debrief and thank participants and gather feedback on app usability and features.

• IRB Submission

  • IRB Form: Application detailing study objectives, methods, and ethical considerations for IRB approval.
  • Informed Consent Form: Document outlining study details and participant rights, obtained before participation.
  • CITI Human Subjects Training Certificates: Proof of completing ethical research training.
  • Finalized Protocol Script: Detailed outline of study procedures.
  • Prototype: Visual representation of the application being tested.

• Overall Key Takeaways:

• Usability Test Plan: Evaluate navigation, task effectiveness, and user satisfaction. Target cooking enthusiasts, focusing on preferences and expectations. Tasks cover navigation, pantry management, and feedback collection.

• Draft Protocol: Welcome participants, explain purpose, and conduct tasks. Tasks include adding ingredients, finding/saving recipes, and navigating meal plans. Debrief to gather feedback on usability and features.

• IRB Submission: Submit IRB application, informed consent form, CITI training certificates, protocol script, and prototype. Ensure compliance with ethical standards and regulatory requirements.

Full phase III report