Designing for complex public environments requires more than addressing isolated user interactions. It demands an understanding of the broader system in which these interactions occur. Therefore, I decided to conduct further research in relation with the help of a university lecture and five different strategic methods, that aim to provide further clarity and a more structured insight into the different parts of this project.

System Mapping

The first of those approaches is system mapping. It is used within design research to visualize relationships between actors, infrastructures, and external influences. Rather than focusing on single touchpoints, system maps enable designers to identify interdependencies, power structures, and flows of information, and uncover opportunities for more systemic and sustainable interventions (zero360., 2026). In this project, system mapping serves as the starting point for investigating the experience of German train platforms. These environments are characterized by high density, time pressure, and diverse user groups, making them inherently complex.

At the center of the system map lies the proposed design intervention: a physical guidance system intended to improve orientation and interaction on platforms. Placing this concept at the core allows for a structured analysis of how it connects to and influences the surrounding system. The layer around the focal point consists of direct stakeholders, including passengers, train staff, and Deutsche Bahn (DB). Passengers represent the primary user group, yet they are far from homogeneous. Commuters prioritize efficiency and speed, tourists require clarity and guidance, while elderly users or individuals with disabilities depend on accessibility and physical support. Train staff and conductors, on the other hand, are concerned with operational efficiency and safety. By mapping these different perspectives, it becomes clear that improving the platform experience requires balancing multiple, and sometimes competing, needs. Expanding outward, the system includes indirect stakeholders such as station personnel, UX designers, engineers, and production teams. These actors are responsible for implementing, maintaining, and iterating the proposed solution. Their inclusion highlights that design outcomes are not only shaped by user needs but also by technical feasibility, organizational structures, and economic constraints. On an even broader level, societal actors, such as the general public and environmental stakeholders, introduce additional layers of influence, shaping long-term priorities such as sustainability and public acceptance.

The relationships between these actors are visualized through a network of connections, illustrating flows of communication, influence, and dependency. The density of these connections reveals a highly dynamic system in which changes to one element can have cascading effects across others. This insight directly informs the next step of the design process: evaluating how an intervention might alter the system.

Discovered Change & Impact

To address this, a Change and Impact map was developed. Building directly on the system map, it introduces a temporal dimension by comparing the current state (“Before”) with a projected future scenario (“After”). The “Before” perspective synthesizes the key issues identified in the system analysis, including disorientation, overcrowding, inefficient boarding processes, and limited accessibility. These challenges are not isolated but interconnected, reinforcing one another and contributing to an overall stressful experience (Mural, 2025).

The “After” perspective explores how the proposed physical guidance system could transform these conditions. For example, improved orientation may reduce passenger uncertainty, which in turn can streamline movement flows and support more efficient boarding. However, the map also critically considers potential trade-offs, such as increased reliance on technological systems, maintenance requirements, or unintended behavioral changes among users. This step is crucial, as it ensures that the design is not evaluated in isolation but as an active component within a complex system. The logical progression from system mapping to impact evaluation demonstrates how insights are translated into informed design decisions.

Inclusion & Accessibility

In parallel, the project integrates inclusion and accessibility as fundamental design principles. Inclusive design research emphasizes that accessibility should be embedded from the beginning, rather than later along the design process (Figma, 2026). To operationalize this, two additional mapping approaches were used. The first identifies the physical, cognitive, and social requirements necessary for users to fully experience the product. The second focuses on barriers, analyzing which user groups may be excluded and why.

This analysis revealed that physical guidance systems, while potentially beneficial, can also introduce new barriers, particularly for individuals with visual, auditory, or cognitive impairments. As a result, the design strategy prioritizes multimodal interaction, ensuring that information is communicated through multiple sensory channels. At the same time, a minimal and clear design language is emphasized to avoid adding complexity to already dense environments. These considerations are directly linked back to the system map, reinforcing the idea that inclusive design is not a separate concern, but an integral part of the overall system.

Value Proposition Canvas

To further refine the concept, the Value Proposition Canvas (Strategyzer, 2026) was applied. This tool builds on previous analyzes by explicitly linking user needs to design solutions. The Customer Profile identifies key user goals, such as navigating efficiently and reducing stress, alongside pains like confusion and overcrowding.

The Value Map translates these insights into concrete design features, including intuitive guidance systems and improved information structures. To get a second view point, the canvas was also applied to Deutsche Bahn as an organizational stakeholder, highlighting goals such as operational efficiency and customer satisfaction. This dual perspective ensures that the proposed solution aligns both with user expectations and institutional objectives.

Product Idea

The outcome of this interconnected process is a product concept for a physical guidance system integrated into train platforms. While still in the brain-storm phase, the current direction explores the use of light-based elements, such as illuminated pathways or dynamic signals, to guide passengers intuitively. The concept directly responds to the insights generated through the system mapping, the impact analysis, and the user-centered frameworks.

Information Gathered

In conclusion, the use of system mapping, Change and Impact analysis, inclusive design methods, and value-driven frameworks were valuable methods to create valid connections and help get a clearer picture of the problem at hand and what factors have to be considered, when designing for a complex and challenging physical space. Each method builds upon the previous one, creating a logical progression from understanding complexity to proposing targeted interventions. This showed me how important it is to view design not as isolated problem-solving, but as a practice to deeply understand complex interactions and interconnected systems.

Next Steps

With the added insights and findings, the prototypes that were already developed can be refined and tested. After that I want to work on defining the end product narrower through more in-depth research and prototyping with higher fidelity.

Literaturverzeichnis

Figma. (2026). Accessibility and inclusion in design. Von Figma: https://www.figma.com/resource-library/creating-accessible-and-inclusive-design/ abgerufen

Mural. (2025). Change impact assessment template. Von Mural: https://www.mural.co/templates/change-impact-assessment abgerufen

Strategyzer. (28. January 2026). The Value Proposition Canvas. Von Strategyzer: https://www.strategyzer.com/library/the-value-proposition-canvas abgerufen

zero360. (2026). Was ist: System Mapping. Von zero360.: https://zero360.de/glossar/system-mapping/ abgerufen

A product or business idea is a structured proposal that identifies a specific problem, outlines a solution, and defines how value is created for users and stakeholders. In design-driven innovation, such ideas are grounded in real user needs and aim to create both functional and experiential improvements.

Understanding the underlying idea of a product is the first and most important step in its development. For the idea of a guiding system at German train stations the exact paraments for the final product are not yet defined. But a closer look at the product idea is still a valuable step towards more clarity and understanding.

The core problem lies in the current experience of train platforms, which are often perceived as stressful, unorganized, and confusing environments. Boarding and exiting trains can be physically demanding, especially during peak times or for individuals with limited mobility. This creates friction in the interaction between passengers, trains, and the platform itself, ultimately reducing the overall quality of the travel experience.

Addressing this issue matters because improving the usability and comfort of train travel can make it a more attractive mode of transportation. A better experience could encourage more people to choose trains over cars, contributing to reduced traffic congestion and lower environmental impact.

The proposed solution is a physical guiding system integrated directly into train platforms. While still in development, the current idea is the use of light-based elements, such as illuminated pathways, signals, or dynamic indicators, to guide passengers intuitively. This system would enhance orientation, communicate real-time information, and support smoother boarding and alighting processes without adding visual clutter.

The target audience includes all users of the train system, with a primary focus on passengers. At the same time, organizations like Deutsche Bahn act as key stakeholders and customers, investing in and maintaining the system. The expected impact includes improved navigation, more efficient passenger flow, and a more structured and user-friendly platform environment.

From a business perspective, the model could involve an initial infrastructure investment by railway operators, followed by ongoing maintenance.

Ultimately, the idea combines user-centered design with systemic impact, aiming to transform train platforms into more intuitive, accessible, and enjoyable spaces.

The Value Proposition Canvas is a strategic tool used in design and innovation to ensure that a product or service aligns closely with user needs. It consists of two main components: the Customer Profile and the Value Map. The Customer Profile focuses on understanding the user by identifying their jobs (what they want to achieve), pains (challenges or frustrations), and gains (desired outcomes or benefits). The Value Map, on the other hand, outlines how a product or service responds to these needs through products and services, pain relievers, and gain creators. Together, these tools help designers create solutions that are both relevant and impactful. (Strategyzer, 2026)

To get a better understanding of the anticipated product and its purpose for the user, two canvases were produced for two different players. The first one focuses on the train passenger as an end user. Their Customer Profile emphasizes practical goals such as arriving on time, navigating platforms easily, and boarding trains without stress. Gains include comfort, clarity, and reliability, while pains involve confusion, overcrowding, physical strain, and lack of accessible information. The Value Map responds with a physical support and guidance system, clearer information structures, and inclusive design features to accommodate diverse user needs.

The second example represents the Deutsche Bahn (DB) as a customer. Here, the Customer Profile highlights organizational goals such as transporting passengers efficiently from A to B, ensuring smooth system operations, and maintaining profitability. The identified gains include improved punctuality, enhanced public image, and increased customer satisfaction. However, DB also faces significant pains, such as technical failures, delays, and negative public perception. The corresponding Value Map proposes solutions like improved guidance systems, better information displays, and more structured platforms, all aimed at reducing inefficiencies and enhancing the overall service experience.

Overall, these two profiles demonstrate how the Value Proposition Canvas can bridge organizational objectives and user experiences, enabling more targeted and user-centered design solutions.

Inclusion and accessibility are essential considerations in contemporary design and innovation. Considering diverse user groups and varying physical and cognitive abilities should not be an afterthought, but rather an integral part of the design process from the very beginning. By doing so, designers can develop solutions that are inclusive by default, rather than needing later adjustments. One useful method to support this approach is the creation of a map that outlines what is required for users to fully experience a product, considering not only personal and physical aspects, but also social and environmental factors. Such a map was developed for this project, which focuses on improving the UX design of German train platforms. It highlights the various conditions that must be met to ensure an optimal and inclusive user experience.

Building on this, a second mapping method was used to specifically analyze inclusion, problems, and barriers. This map takes a closer look at potential obstacles the design might create, identifies which user groups are included or excluded, and explores the problems that arise from these barriers. Most importantly, it also considers possible solutions to reduce or eliminate them. In this project, many of the identified barriers particularly affect people with disabilities or impairments, who may not be able to fully perceive or interact with certain elements of a physical design.

To address this, the goal is to provide multiple ways for users to experience and understand the design, ensuring accessibility for as many people as possible. At the same time, a clear and minimal design approach is prioritized to avoid adding further complexity or confusion to already busy train platform environments.

Overall, inclusion has been explored through these mapping methods as a foundational step in the design process. While further refinement is necessary, this work provides valuable insights into user needs and establishes a strong basis for developing more inclusive solutions moving forward.

The Change and Impact map I developed is structured around two key perspectives: “Before” and “After.” These two sides represent the situation prior to and following the introduction of the proposed product. This comparative approach is intended not only to highlight the potential improvements the design aims to achieve, but also to critically reflect on any negative consequences or challenges that may arise as a result of its implementation. By placing both aspects side by side, the map encourages a balanced and realistic evaluation of the design intervention.

In my project, the “Before” section focuses on the current issues experienced at German train platforms. These include challenges faced by passengers, such as confusion, lack of orientation, or limited accessibility, as well as difficulties encountered by train conductors and Deutsche Bahn (DB), including time inefficiencies and operational constraints. This side of the map serves as a diagnostic tool, clearly outlining the pain points within the existing system and establishing a foundation for targeted improvements.

The “After” section, in contrast, explores the potential outcomes following the introduction of a physical UX solution at train platforms. It considers possible side effects, including shifts in user behavior, increased reliance on technological systems, additional resource requirements, or the emergence of technical issues. This ensures that the proposal is not viewed in an overly idealistic way, but rather as part of a complex system with both benefits and trade-offs.

When analyzing the map, it becomes evident that the “Before” side contains more negative aspects than the “After” side. This imbalance can be interpreted as a positive indicator, suggesting that the proposed solution has strong potential to improve the current situation.

Overall, the Change and Impact map provides a valuable framework for assessing both the opportunities and limitations of the design, supporting more thoughtful and responsible decision-making.

A system map is a visual tool used to understand complex environments by illustrating how different actors, elements, and relationships are connected. Within a research process, it helps designers move beyond isolated touchpoints and instead grasp the bigger picture: how users, organizations, and external influences interact with one another. By mapping these relationships, dependencies and opportunities for improvement become more visible, enabling more informed, holistic, and connected design decisions.

The project I am currently working on focuses on German train stations and explores how physical UX and UI design can improve the user experience on train platforms. At the center of my system map is the intended product: a form of physical assistance at train platforms. This core element is surrounded by the direct users, customers, and those most immediately impacted. In this case, these include train conductors, train staff, Deutsche Bahn (DB), and most importantly, passengers. These passengers represent a diverse group, ranging from regular commuters and tourists to elderly individuals and people with disabilities. Each bringing different needs and challenges to the experience.

Beyond this inner circle are indirect users and stakeholders, such as train station workers, UX researchers, and production teams responsible for developing and implementing solutions. Larger institutional actors, including DB and associated organizations, also play a key role in shaping the system.

The outer layers capture broader societal influences, such as the German public and environmental activists, who indirectly affect priorities and decision-making processes.

The connections between all these actors are visualized through arrows, representing communication and interaction within the system. The density and direction of these connections highlight the dynamic, interconnected, and often circular nature of influence, revealing the complexity of the system as a whole.

Overall, this system map demonstrates that improving a seemingly simple experience requires understanding a complex network of stakeholders, making it a valuable tool for gaining deeper insight and a clearer overview of all relevant factors.

Prototyping is an important step in the design and development process. A prototype can be described as an early sample, model, or version of a product that is built in order to test a concept or process. It is typically used to validate a product’s design and functionality and to gather feedback from potential users before investing in mass production. In addition, prototypes help define the specifications and requirements for the final product (Arena, 2026). Because of this, prototyping often serves as a valuable starting point for projects that aim to create digital or physical products.

Within the field of design, prototypes are commonly categorized into three different stages: low, medium, and high fidelity. In this context, the term fidelity refers to the level of detail, accuracy, and realism of a prototype in comparison to the final product (Sorodoc, 2025). A low-fidelity prototype is intended to provide a rough representation of an idea and to communicate the basic concept of a product. These prototypes are usually simple, inexpensive, and quick to produce, which allows designers to visualize ideas and gather early feedback without the risk of significant costs.

Medium-fidelity prototypes contain more accurate and detailed elements and begin to demonstrate specific functions and interactions. At this stage, the prototype offers a clearer impression of how the product might look and behave, making it suitable for more structured user testing and feedback.

High-fidelity prototypes represent the stage closest to the final product. They contain a high level of visual detail and interactive elements and allow realistic testing before final production decisions are made. Due to their complexity, these prototypes typically require the greatest investment of time and resources.

The current research project focuses on user experience design at German train stations and investigates how the experience on train platforms could be improved for passengers. After examining the theoretical background of this topic over the past six months and building a solid foundation of knowledge about the relevant parameters, design considerations, and possible approaches, it is now a logical next step to move toward more practical exploration. Prototyping offers the opportunity to translate theoretical insights into tangible experiments and to explore how the project’s ideas could be implemented in practice.

Low fidelity prototype

To explore this practical dimension, three different low-fidelity prototypes were conceptualized and developed. Each prototype approaches the same problem from a slightly different perspective while using different materials and forms of interaction. The first prototype was created as a paper prototype, which is a simple yet effective method for developing an early representation of an idea using inexpensive and easily accessible materials. Paper prototyping allows designers to test concepts quickly and to discard or modify them easily while still gathering useful insights and feedback (msg, 2026). For this prototype, a sketch of a train platform was created to represent the situation of a train arriving at a station. Participants were asked to place circles representing different passenger groups on the platform drawing. The task was to indicate where they believed these users would position themselves in order to board the train. This exercise aims to identify whether there are recognizable patterns in passenger placement and whether the current signage and orientation systems on train platforms provide enough information for users to intuitively position themselves.

The second prototype also uses paper as the main material but aims to create a more interactive and flexible representation of the scenario. In this version, a simple model of a train platform was built that includes small figures representing passengers. Participants can move these figures around the platform in order to simulate their behavior when a train arrives. Similar to the first prototype, the central question concerns the positioning of passengers and the information they might need to find an optimal location for boarding. After completing the task, participants are invited to draw directly on the prototype to indicate where additional signage, markings, or guidance systems could improve the clarity and usability of the platform. This approach allows users not only to demonstrate their behavior but also to actively propose potential design improvements.

The third low-fidelity prototype explores a digital approach instead of a physical one. For this prototype, the collaborative digital workspace Miro was used. Miro functions as an online whiteboard that allows multiple users to interact with visual elements in a shared digital environment (Miro, 2026). Within this digital workspace, a simplified representation of a train platform was created. Participants join the Miro board and are asked to place themselves within the platform layout in the position where they would choose to wait for an approaching train. After this initial round, participants are allowed to add visual guidance elements such as lines, colors, signs, or other indicators that they believe would help clarify where passengers should stand. Once these elements have been added, the task is repeated so that the results can be compared, and it can be observed whether the additional guidance elements improve user behavior and decision-making.

Those three prototype will be tested and the results and observations will be evaluated to see whether one of the approaches could be beneficial and whether one of the prototypes has the potential for further improvement.

Information gathered

Exploring these different prototyping approaches has provided a deeper understanding of the role prototypes play in the design process. Prototypes are not only useful for testing digital interfaces but can also be applied to spatial and physical interaction scenarios such as those found in public transportation environments. Through the upcoming testing phase, valuable insights are expected to emerge regarding how passengers interpret spatial information on train platforms and which design interventions could help improve clarity and usability. These findings will contribute to the broader investigation of user experience design in railway environments.

Next Steps

The next step in the project will involve testing the three prototypes with participants in order to gather feedback and behavioural observations. The collected information will then be analysed to determine whether one of the approaches proves particularly effective and whether any of the prototypes show potential for further development. Based on the insights gained during this phase, the most promising concept may be refined and further developed into a medium-fidelity prototype that allows for more detailed testing and continued exploration of improved user experience design solutions for train platforms.

Reference

Arena. (2026). What is a Prototype? Von Arena: https://www.arenasolutions.com/resources/glossary/prototype/ abgerufen

Miro. (2026). Von Miro: https://miro.com/de/ abgerufen

msg. (2026). Paper prototype. Von User Experience Methods Catalogue: https://user-experience-methods.com/en/04_design/paper-prototype.html abgerufen

Sorodoc, I. (11. March 2025). Low-Fidelity vs. High-Fidelity Prototyping: Key Differences Explained. Von ProtoPie: https://www.protopie.io/blog/low-fidelity-vs-high-fidelity-prototyping abgerufen

Noisy Flesh is compelling precisely because it resists the dominant paradigm of seamless, efficient wearable interaction. Instead of functioning as a “second skin,” the textile becomes an intrusive, body-altering prosthesis that reshapes posture, gesture, and sonic possibility. This shift from integration to transformation is conceptually strong and refreshingly critical.

The decision to employ audification grounds the sonic output in the material behavior of the textile. We do not simply hear mapped gestures. We hear the friction, compression, and instability of conductive threads under strain. This creates a tight perceptual loop between force and sound, reinforcing the sense that the prosthetic extensions are alive and responsive. The weighted extra limbs and collision-based sensors further introduce physical unpredictability, allowing gravity and inertia to participate in the composition. In this way, agency emerges from material dynamics rather than computational complexity.

What stands out most is the deliberate rejection of intuitive control. The interface demands negotiation, asking the performer to invent movement strategies specific to its deformable structure. As a design approach, this is bold and philosophically aligned with embodied and entangled interaction frameworks. At the same time, it raises productive questions about mastery and sustainability in performance: how the performer internalizes, or resists, the prosthesis over time would be an important area for further exploration.

The grotesque, low-frequency sonic aesthetic coherently aligns with the visual metaphor of redundant body parts, yet it also feels intentionally constrained. Expanding the sonic vocabulary in future iterations could deepen the expressive range and complicate audience expectations of what such a body might sound like.

Overall, Noisy Flesh makes a meaningful contribution to sound-centered interaction design by treating the interface not as a transparent tool but as an active, deforming collaborator. It proposes a model of wearable technology that amplifies tension rather than minimizing it, allowing sound to emerge from the friction between body, textile, and resistance.

The final step of this research phase was to conduct the planned surveys at two German train stations. Due to changes in my travel schedule and time availability since the last blog post, I conducted the interviews in Berlin and Munich instead of Augsburg as originally planned. Despite this adjustment, I was able to approach a diverse range of people at both stations and collect valuable data and insights through the interviews. The final step of this phase was to organize, review, and analyze the collected data.

Questioning

Before bringing the survey to the train stations, I first tested the questions with family members and friends. This initial test phase aimed to evaluate whether the questions were understood as intended and whether they were concise and easy to answer. The feedback was largely positive, and only minor adjustments were necessary. As a result, I was able to proceed confidently to the next stage of the research.

The first round of on-site interviews took place in Berlin during one of my trips. At Berlin Main Station, I spoke with three participants and asked them the prepared survey questions. The selected individuals represented a diverse group and provided a range of interesting and varied responses. With the participants’ consent, I recorded the conversations, which was particularly helpful during the data analysis phase.

The second survey location was Munich Main Station. There, I interviewed five people in the area around the train platforms. Once again, the participants were diverse in terms of age, gender, and language background. All interviewees agreed to voice recording and provided detailed answers to the questions. However, the high level of background noise, caused by ongoing construction work in addition to the typical sounds of a busy train station, posed a minor challenge. It made conversations more difficult and resulted in some recordings being less clear than desired.

Despite these limitations, I am satisfied with the overall outcome of the survey and the number of participants I was able to engage within a relatively short period of time.

Analysis

To take a deeper look at the data collected during the surveys, I began by transcribing the voice recordings into text format. I chose to retain the original languages of the participants, resulting in transcripts in both German and English, depending on the language used during the interviews. Writing out the individual responses allowed me to gain a clear overview of the answers and to identify the range of opinions, experiences, and ideas shared by the participants.

Here is the overview I created for the interviews:

Some of the responses were expected, while others were surprising and addressed aspects I had not personally considered. For the rating-based questions, the scores varied between two and seven, reflecting a wide range of individual experiences. Responses to the question about problematic locations within train stations differed significantly between participants. In contrast, the question asking whether improvements to train platforms would lead to a better user experience was answered with “yes” by all participants.

The final question, which asked participants to share their own ideas, was not answered by everyone, as it was the most challenging and time-consuming question. Nevertheless, the responses I did receive were highly insightful. One of the biggest surprises was that a participant identified the service center as the most problematic area within a train station. This answer stood out to me because it was not something I would have mentioned based on my own travel experiences. However, it is a valid and understandable perspective and just as valuable as the other responses.

One particularly encouraging moment was when a participant suggested improvements in information structure, clearer signage, and floor-based guidance systems to enhance orientation. These ideas closely align with my own thoughts and proposed directions for the project, and it was reassuring to see that another user independently identified similar areas for improvement.

Information Gathered

My main takeaway from this method of data collection is that users experience train stations in very different ways, both during their journeys and while spending time at the stations themselves. However, one point all participants agreed on was that train stations are in need of further improvement, and that these changes should be implemented as soon as possible.

I also found that while users identify multiple problematic areas within train stations, improvements to train platforms in particular would be highly appreciated. Participants expressed the belief that enhancing platform design and functionality would significantly improve their overall travel experience in Germany.

Overall, the survey provided useful and insightful responses that fulfilled my initial goal of gaining a broader and more diverse understanding of everyday user experiences. I therefore consider this research step to be both successful and valuable for the continuation of my project.

Final Conclusion

Over the course of the last ten blog posts, I had the opportunity to explore my chosen topic from multiple perspectives and to experiment with different research approaches. This process served as an important first step into the subject and made it clear to me how engaging and complex this field is, as well as how many opportunities there are for further exploration, experimentation, and design. It also showed me that user experience at German train stations is a real-world challenge with significant potential for improvement and innovation.

For these reasons, I plan to continue researching this topic in the future. My goal is to further broaden and deepen my knowledge while moving closer to developing concrete and meaningful solutions to improve the user experience at German train stations.

As mentioned in the previous blog post, the final step of the project at this stage is to prepare and conduct surveys at at least two train stations in Germany. To achieve this, all preparations for the survey execution must be carefully planned and completed. Once this is done, the questions can be tested in a pilot phase before being used in a public setting.

Locations

To gain a more diverse insight into the opinions and experiences of travelers at German train stations, I plan to conduct surveys at two different locations. If the project is continued at a later stage, this approach could be expanded to include additional stations in order to further broaden the range of perspectives. For the current phase, however, two locations are realistic given the available time and resources. The selected stations are Augsburg Main Station and Berlin Main Station. These two locations differ significantly in terms of size, geographical context, and user demographics, which should provide insights from a wide range of travelers in varying situations.

Questions

There are several types of questions that can be used in a survey, including open-ended and closed-ended questions, as well as formats such as nominal scales, Likert scales, rating scales, and yes-or-no questions. To begin the survey, closed-ended questions are particularly useful because they offer predefined answer options, making them quicker and easier for participants to respond to. They also allow for the collection of clear, comparable data. These questions can then be followed by open-ended questions, which do not restrict responses and give participants the freedom to express their thoughts in their own words, allowing for deeper qualitative insights (Content Square, 2024).

For this project, I will primarily use closed-ended questions, specifically rating-scale questions and yes/no questions. These formats provide participants with clear answer options, making the survey quick and easy to complete while still producing structured and comparable results. In addition, I will include a small number of open-ended questions to gather more detailed and in-depth responses. Overall, the survey will be designed to be brief, keeping the required effort for participants as low as possible. A shorter questionnaire also allows me to approach more people within a limited time frame, enabling the collection of a wider range of perspectives.

The questions I’m planning to ask are:

Approach

Before finalizing the questionnaire, I will test the questions with people in my immediate surroundings. Based on their feedback, I will make the necessary adjustments to improve clarity and effectiveness. This process will result in a finalized version of the questionnaire, which will then be used at the selected train stations.

I plan to record the interviews after obtaining the participant’s consent. As I do not intend to ask any personal or sensitive questions, data protection regulations should not pose an issue when using the collected information. The interviews will be recorded on my phone and later used to support a more accurate and efficient analysis of the data. I plan to visit each selected location one to two times and approach as many travelers, station employees, and other relevant individuals as possible.

Information Gathered

This week, I was able to develop a more detailed and finalized plan for the survey process. I also deepened my understanding of different question types and identified those most suitable for this project, allowing me to integrate them effectively into my research design.

Next Steps

I will allocate up to two weeks for conducting the surveys, particularly because the research location in Berlin requires travel. During this period, I aim to collect as many responses as possible to analyze the data thoroughly and draw meaningful conclusions.

References

Content Square. (5. November 2024). 24 on-site survey questions to ask your users. Von Content Square: https://contentsquare.com/guides/surveys/questions/ abgerufen