Reading Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies

As part of the course Proseminar Master Thesis, I had the opportunity to read Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies by Akkelies van Nes and Claudia Yamu. Reading this book was a valuable experience for me, as it allowed me to deepen my understanding of spatial awareness and explore how complex topics related to the built environment can be broken down, examined, and analysed. It also encouraged me to look at spaces from a different perspective and to think more carefully about the relationship between spatial design and human behaviour.

One of the aspects I found particularly interesting was the way the authors explain the connection between the configuration of spaces, accessibility, human movement, and social activities. Before reading the book, I had not fully considered how strongly the arrangement and connection of different spaces can influence the way people move through and experience their surroundings. The book introduced me to new ways of looking at spatial relationships and showed me that even seemingly simple questions about how people use a space can involve complex structures and patterns. I found it especially interesting that these relationships can be investigated systematically using different methods of spatial analysis. This helped me understand how a broad and complex topic can be divided into smaller aspects that can then be examined individually.

At the same time, reading the book was quite challenging for me. Until now, I have mainly worked with online articles, shorter academic papers, or selected chapters from books when conducting research. Reading an entire academic book was therefore a new experience and required a different level of commitment. It took more time and concentration to work through the material, especially when several theoretical concepts were introduced and connected to one another. Sometimes, I found it difficult to understand how individual concepts related to the overall topic. I also realised that reading a whole book requires more than simply collecting information that seems relevant at first glance. It is important to follow the authors’ arguments, understand the structure of the book, and recognise how the different chapters build on each other.

Despite the challenges, I really appreciated the opportunity to engage with a topic in greater depth. Reading the book broadened my knowledge and gave me new ideas and perspectives that I can take into my own research. It also made me more aware of how important it is to build a solid theoretical foundation before approaching a research question. Even when a book does not directly address my specific research topic, it can still provide valuable concepts and ways of thinking that help me develop my own approach.

Links:

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-59140-3?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://spacesyntax.com

Experiencing Space Through Light: Inspiration from Tomás Saraceno at Haus der Kunst

I visited the current exhibition by Tomás Saraceno at Haus der Kunst in Munich. The exhibition connects art, architecture and science through spatial environments and installations that invite visitors to perceive their surroundings differently. What made this experience particularly relevant to my Master’s thesis was the use of light, projections and interactive installations to influence how visitors experience and move through a space.

Since I want to focus on user experience design at German train platforms in my Master’s thesis, I’m particularly interested in exploring how light could be used to guide passengers through their environment. Although I have already spent considerable time researching this topic, I am still looking for inspiration beyond conventional wayfinding systems, such as signs, floor markings and digital displays. Visiting the exhibition allowed me to experience spatial design from a different perspective and consider how light could become an active part of an environment rather than simply illuminating it.

In my research, I have already explored ideas about how light could be used as part of a flexible and adaptable guidance system. However, I am still collecting new perspectives that could help me develop and question my existing ideas. A particularly interesting aspect of the exhibition was the way the rooms were kept dark, allowing the artworks to become the main sources of light. The installations were not only artworks but also served as visual reference points that helped visitors navigate the space and move from one area to the next.

Of course, a train platform does not offer the same controlled conditions as a carefully curated exhibition space. Nevertheless, this experience made me more aware of the importance of placing orientation points within a reasonable distance of one another. I started to think of them as stepping stones, with each point providing a visual reference that helps people find the next one and continue moving through the environment. Rather than expecting passengers to understand an entire space at once, a sequence of clearly positioned visual cues might help them navigate it step by step. This is an idea I find quite interesting and would like to investigate further in my upcoming research. At the same time, I recognise that an artistic installation and a practical wayfinding system have very different purposes. An art installation often aims to encourage exploration, evoke emotions or challenge how visitors perceive their surroundings. At a train platform, guidance needs to be clear, reliable and immediately understandable. Passengers may be in a hurry, carrying luggage, travelling with children or trying to navigate an unfamiliar station.

This difference is precisely what makes the exhibition valuable as an impulse for my research. Rather than trying to reproduce an artistic effect, I want to investigate which principles could be transferred into a practical design context. How does light attract attention, and how can it do so without distracting passengers from their surroundings? How many orientation points are needed to help people understand where to go next and at what distance should these points be placed to create a continuous and understandable route? Could light communicate direction without causing confusion? And how might its effectiveness change depending on the architecture, daylight conditions or the number of people on a platform? These questions could help me examine whether light-based guidance would be useful and usable in practice.

The exhibition did not provide a ready-made solution for my Master’s thesis, but it expanded the way I think about possible design approaches. It encouraged me to look beyond established transport design conventions and consider how light and spatial relationships could contribute to orientation via breaking information down into smaller steps and orientation points.

My main takeaway from this visit is that inspiration for design research can come from disciplines outside the immediate field of study. Although the exhibition was created within an artistic context, it gave me a new perspective on the relationship between light, architecture, movement and human perception. Most importantly, it helped me identify a specific aspect worth exploring further: whether a sequence of visual orientation points could support passengers in navigating train platforms more intuitively.

Links/Media:

https://www.hausderkunst.de/eintauchen/tomas-saraceno

https://www.toptal.com/designers/creative-direction/art-vs-design

https://mabiloft.com/en/blog/insights/ux-and-psychology-micro-steps-in-ux-to-motivate-users

When Accessibility Fails: The Impact of AI and Exclusive Design

On the second day of the World Usability Congress I attended a talk by Stefan Barac that became the most valuable learning experience of the entire conference for me. The talk focused on digital accessibility and the factors that continue to exclude people from digital products and services. Since I have been researching the topic of my Master’s thesis, user experience design at German train platforms, for over a year, I already have a broad understanding of the subject. However, I am still exploring how accessibility and inclusion should influence my design concept. I chose this talk in the hope of gaining new perspectives and challenging my existing assumptions, particularly by learning from a speaker with first-hand experience of disability.

The speaker used satire and practical examples to challenge common assumptions about accessibility. One approach was to imagine how an accessible service could deliberately be made inaccessible. By reversing the design process, it became easier to identify which decisions create barriers, which groups are affected and how those barriers could be prevented. I found this approach particularly effective because accessibility guidelines can sometimes feel abstract. Looking at design from the perspective of exclusion makes the consequences of individual decisions much more tangible and encourages designers to question choices they might otherwise take for granted. An important part of the talk addressed the continued presence of exclusionary design choices in digital products. Accessibility problems are not necessarily caused by a lack of technology or knowledge, but can also result from design decisions that overlook the needs of people with disabilities. For example, navigation that cannot be used effectively with a keyboard, unclear interaction patterns or interfaces that rely on only one way of receiving information can prevent people from accessing a service independently. The talk reminded me that a product can appear functional to its designers while still creating significant difficulties for some of its users. This highlighted the importance of looking beyond the intended design and examining how people actually experience and interact with it.

I see a strong connection between these insights and my research into the user experience at German train platforms. Travelling by train involves more than the physical platform itself. Passengers also rely on signage, digital departure boards, announcements and other information systems to orient themselves and make decisions. If information is difficult to find, understand or access, the overall travel experience can become stressful or confusing. This may be particularly challenging for passengers with visual or hearing impairments, mobility limitations or other individual needs. The talk encouraged me to consider accessibility not as a separate aspect of platform design, but as an essential part of the entire passenger experience, including the interaction between the physical environment and the information provided.

The part of the talk that challenged my thinking most was the discussion of artificial intelligence. AI is often presented as a tool that can make accessibility improvements easier and more efficient, for example by automatically identifying errors. However, the speaker explained how the uncritical use of AI can reinforce existing patterns of exclusion and potentially make accessibility worse. This made me reconsider the assumption that technological progress automatically leads to a better user experience. Technology alone cannot guarantee inclusion; its value depends on how it is developed, applied and evaluated. In the context of train platforms, this means that digital displays, information systems and potential technological interventions should be assessed according to whether they genuinely support passengers in real situations. Automated tools may be useful, but they cannot replace critical thinking, user research and testing with the people affected by design decisions.

The main impulse I will take into my Master’s thesis is the importance of identifying barriers before developing design solutions. Although I have already spent considerable time researching my topic, the talk encouraged me to look more critically at how accessibility is integrated into my concept. Rather than treating inclusion as an additional feature, I want to consider it from the beginning of the design process. I also want to explore opportunities to discuss and test my ideas with people with disabilities. Their experiences and feedback could reveal challenges I might not identify through research alone and help me develop a concept that responds more closely to the needs of different passengers.

Another aspect that made this talk particularly meaningful was the opportunity to speak with Stefan Barac after the presentation. I asked him questions about my Master’s thesis and explained some of the challenges I am currently considering in my research. He was open to staying in contact and meeting again at a later point to discuss my topic in more detail. This personal exchange was especially valuable because it offered the possibility of receiving further feedback from someone with expertise and first-hand experience in accessibility. It also showed me how attending a conference can contribute to research not only through the talks themselves, but also through conversations and connections that continue afterwards.

Overall, this talk gave me a new perspective on an aspect of my Master’s thesis that I am still working to define. It reinforced my understanding of accessibility as an ongoing responsibility rather than a final checklist and reminded me that inclusive design requires questioning assumptions, recognising different experiences and involving the people affected. Moving forward, I want to apply these insights to my research on German train platforms and investigate how the passenger experience can be improved through more accessible physical environments, clearer information and better-designed interactions. Most importantly, I want to ensure that the concept I develop is informed not only by my own perspective as a designer, but also by the experiences of the people who will use these spaces.

Links:

Agenda 26

https://www.nion-digital.com/nion-next-2025/masterclasses/stefan-barac-und-claudio-zeni

https://www.uxtweak.com/podcast/stefan-barac-accessibility

Designing Inclusive Public Spaces Through Human-Centred Technology

Attending the World Usability Congress 2026 in Graz gave me the opportunity to explore how usability and human-centred design can be applied beyond digital products. One talk that particularly caught my attention was right away the first one I attended. It focused on the connection between user experience strategies, smart cities and the development of more inclusive communities. I chose this talk because I thought it sounded relevant for the topic I want to explore in my Master’s thesis, as it dealt with how public spaces can be designed and improved through technology while keeping the needs of different people in mind.

The talk discussed how established UX strategies, such as user research, clear roadmaps, iterative development and ethical considerations, can be applied to larger systems like cities. Instead of looking at usability only in the context of websites or applications, the talk encouraged thinking about how people interact with their entire environment. One of the main points was the idea of a human-centred smart city. Technology can help cities become more accessible, efficient and sustainable, for example through accessible traffic lights, smarter energy systems and improved public safety. Artificial intelligence and machine learning were also presented as tools that can improve access to data and support citizen engagement. However, what interested me most was not the technology itself, but the question of how these systems can genuinely improve people’s everyday experiences.

The talk also highlighted the importance of ethical principles such as fairness, transparency, privacy and inclusivity. I found this aspect especially valuable because technological improvements in public spaces can also create new challenges. For example, collecting data may help identify patterns in how a space is used, but it can also raise questions about privacy and who has access to that information. Similarly, a digital solution might make a service easier to use for some people while excluding others who have limited access to technology. These considerations reinforce the need to evaluate innovations not only by their efficiency, but also by their social impact.

The biggest impulse I took from this talk is the importance of starting with people and their needs rather than starting with a technological solution. For my Master’s thesis, I want to investigate how public spaces, especially train platforms, can be improved through thoughtful design and, where appropriate, supportive technology. The talk encouraged me to consider accessibility and inclusion as fundamental design requirements from the beginning, rather than as additional features introduced later. It also made me think more carefully about how the success of an intervention could be evaluated from the perspective of the people using the space. At the same time, I do not want to adopt every aspect of the approach presented in the talk. In particular, I do not intend to use AI to generate or develop the concept for my research. I want the concept to emerge from my own design process, supported by research, observation and an understanding of users’ needs. For me, it is important that the design decisions can be explained and traced back to the research findings. AI and other technologies may be relevant to the broader discussion of smart cities, but they will not be the tool I rely on to create my concept.

Overall, this talk helped me connect UX principles with the physical and social environment of a city. It strengthened my interest in exploring how design can make public spaces more inclusive, usable and responsive to people’s needs. I will use this impulse to guide my further research, especially when defining the problem, identifying the needs of different user groups and deciding which design interventions could create meaningful improvements.

Links:

Agenda 26

https://www.academia.edu/73680489/Successful_User_Experience_Strategies_and_Roadmaps

https://www.repsol.com/en/energy-move-forward/innovation/smart-cities/index.cshtml

Mindful Navigation with Guiding Light: Design Considerations for Projector Based Indoor Navigation Assistance System

I chose the dissertation „Mindful Navigation with Guiding Light: Design Considerations for Projector Based Indoor Navigation Assistance System“ by Jaewoo Chung. It was submitted to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in February 2012. It investigates problems associated with conventional navigation assistance systems, particularly the concern that users can become disengaged from their physical surroundings when following instructions on a screen. Chung connects this problem to theories of visual attention as well as mindfulness and mindlessness. As an alternative, he develops Guiding Light, a projector-based navigation system that places guidance information directly into the surrounding physical environment. Instead of looking down at a separate screen, users receive information projected onto floors, walls, maps, and other surfaces. The dissertation is structured into an introduction, background and related work, the development of Guiding Light, research into indoor positioning using geomagnetism, a detailed system description, an evaluation, and a conclusion. The practical work therefore consists not only of the Guiding Light interface but also of the technical infrastructure required to make the system function, particularly its indoor positioning system.

In terms of the quality of design and execution, the project is technically ambitious and demonstrates a substantial amount of development work. Chung does not present Guiding Light as a single finished prototype but documents several iterations. Version 1 combined a pico-projector with magnetic, infrared, proximity, and orientation sensors connected to a Nokia N95. Version 2 introduced infrared beacons and a camera to improve positioning and interaction, while Version 3 investigated a camera-based computer-vision approach. This iterative development is one of the strongest aspects of the project because the author evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of different technological approaches instead of assuming that the first solution is sufficient. The final design decision to favour a sensor-based approach over computer vision is also justified in relation to processing power, scalability, data requirements, and the limitations of mobile devices. From a design perspective, the project is convincing conceptually, although the visual quality of the prototype itself is understandably constrained by the technology available at the time. The system is more successful as a research prototype than as a polished final product.

The degree of innovation is particularly high. Projection, augmented reality, and indoor navigation were already established areas of research, so the individual technologies were not completely new. However, their combination with the concept of mindful navigation creates a distinctive research direction. Chung proposes that the environment itself can become the interface, using projected information to guide users while keeping their attention directed towards the surrounding space. The dissertation also contributes technically through its magnetic-field-based indoor positioning system. The system uses distortions in indoor magnetic fields as location fingerprints and was reported to achieve positioning within one metre for 88% of measurements, with an average directional error of four degrees. The combination of interaction design, navigation research, psychology, projection-based augmented reality, and indoor positioning therefore goes beyond a conventional interface design project.

The criterion of independence is also strongly fulfilled. The dissertation demonstrates that Chung independently explored different technological approaches and developed several generations of the prototype. The work involved not only interface design but also hardware, software, positioning algorithms, route planning, and evaluation. The development history shows that decisions were made in response to practical problems encountered during the research. For example, the camera-based version offered greater potential for interaction but introduced higher computational requirements and scalability problems, leading to the decision to return to a sensor-based solution. This gives the work a clear individual research direction rather than making it appear to be a simple implementation of an existing system.

The organisation and structure of the dissertation are generally logical and academically appropriate. The argument develops from the problem of navigation assistance and its theoretical background towards the Guiding Light concept, prototype development, indoor positioning, the complete system, and finally user evaluation. The table of contents shows a clear progression from theory to implementation and testing. The main weakness is the breadth of the project. Two major technical areas—the Guiding Light interface and the magnetic indoor positioning system—receive substantial attention. This makes the dissertation comprehensive, but it also creates the impression that several research projects are being combined into one. The technical positioning research can at times overshadow the central interaction-design question of whether projection actually improves engagement with the environment.

Regarding quality of communication, the thesis is generally understandable and supported by numerous diagrams, photographs, system architectures, and descriptions of the different prototypes. The visual documentation is particularly important because many aspects of the system would be difficult to understand through text alone. The prototype iterations, interaction scenarios, and technical components are made relatively concrete through this material. At the same time, the communication is sometimes weakened by the highly technical sections. Readers primarily interested in interaction design may find the descriptions of sensors, algorithms, magnetic fingerprints, and system architecture difficult to follow. There are also linguistic and grammatical imperfections throughout the dissertation. These do not prevent understanding, but they reduce the overall polish expected from a highly developed academic publication.

The scope of the work is both a strength and a weakness. For a PhD dissertation, the breadth is understandable and demonstrates considerable ambition. For a Master’s-level project, however, the scope would arguably be excessive. The research covers theoretical psychology, visual attention, navigation, augmented reality, interaction design, hardware development, software development, indoor positioning, computer vision, route planning, and empirical user research. This allows Chung to investigate the problem from multiple perspectives, but it also means that some areas are not explored with the same depth. The project would potentially be stronger from a design-research perspective if the central research question were narrower and the technical development were more clearly subordinated to it.

In terms of spelling, care, and accuracy, the technical documentation is one of the strongest parts of the dissertation. Hardware configurations, prototype versions, positioning methods, system architecture, experimental conditions, and evaluation procedures are described in considerable detail. The author also openly discusses the weaknesses of the different prototypes, which increases the credibility of the research. However, spelling, grammar, and typographical errors occur throughout the document. The writing therefore does not always match the otherwise high level of technical care. The visual material and technical descriptions are generally systematic, but the linguistic presentation could have been more carefully edited.

The use of literature is appropriate to the interdisciplinary nature of the research. Chung draws on research concerning navigation assistance, visual attention, mindfulness and mindlessness, indoor positioning, augmented reality, and human-computer interaction. The literature is used not only as background information but also to establish the central research problem: that navigation technologies can influence how users engage with and understand their surroundings. The theoretical framework consequently has a meaningful relationship with the practical work rather than functioning as a separate literature review. One limitation is that, because the dissertation was submitted in 2012, some of the technologies and research contexts are necessarily dated from a contemporary perspective. This is not a weakness in relation to the time of submission, but it is important when assessing the work today.

The practical project is perhaps the most interesting aspect of the dissertation from a design-research perspective. The relationship between research question, theoretical framework, and implementation is unusually direct. The theoretical concern is that screen-based navigation can divide visual attention and disengage users from their environment. The practical response is therefore to move the navigation information from the screen into the environment itself. The artifact is not simply an illustration of the theory; it is the means through which the theory is tested.

The documentation of the practical work is detailed and generally comprehensible. The three prototype generations are described together with their respective strengths and weaknesses, and the final system architecture is explained in later chapters. The thesis also describes concrete interaction scenarios, such as selecting a destination, interacting with a map, and receiving projected directions at decision points. However, the artifact is less accessible as an independent design piece. The dissertation provides photographs and technical documentation, but there is no readily accessible prototype that allows a reader today to experience the interaction directly. As a result, the documentation communicates how the system was constructed more effectively than how it felt to use.

The evaluation is a particularly important strength because it does not simply confirm Chung’s initial assumptions. The study compared projector-based guidance with screen-based guidance and measured factors including navigation errors, travel time, stops, confusion, and head orientation. The Guiding Light group made fewer errors, spent less time looking at a device, and showed greater orientation towards the surrounding environment. However, later results showed that route choice and user control could have a stronger influence on engagement than the difference between projector and screen. Chung himself acknowledges that removing the screen does not necessarily guarantee greater engagement with the environment. This critical interpretation strengthens the academic quality of the project because the artifact is used to investigate a question rather than simply to prove that the proposed concept works.

Overall, the work demonstrates a high level of academic and practical development, although its status as a PhD dissertation makes direct comparison with a Master’s thesis difficult. Its main strengths are its innovative combination of theory and technology, the extensive prototype development, the detailed technical documentation, and the empirical evaluation of the final concept. Its main weaknesses are its very broad scope, technical complexity, inconsistent linguistic quality, and limited accessibility of the artifact itself. From a design perspective, the project is more convincing as a research prototype than as a finished product, but this is appropriate to its research purpose. The strongest lesson is that the practical artifact becomes academically valuable because it is clearly connected to a research question and is subsequently evaluated against that question.

For my own academic work, the most relevant lesson is therefore not simply the use of projected light, but Chung’s approach to connecting theory, design decisions, prototyping, and evaluation. Particularly valuable is the way different prototype versions are documented together with their limitations instead of presenting only the successful final result. This makes the development process transparent and demonstrates independent critical decision-making. At the same time, I would approach the scope more carefully. Chung’s dissertation shows how quickly a design project can expand when interaction design, technology development, and empirical research are all pursued simultaneously. A more focused research question and a clearly defined evaluation strategy could make a comparable project easier to communicate and assess.

In conclusion, Mindful Navigation with Guiding Light is an ambitious and innovative piece of practice-based research with a strong connection between theoretical argument and practical implementation. It is technically impressive, independently developed, and supported by substantial documentation and evaluation. Its weaknesses mainly concern its extensive scope, technical density, linguistic imperfections, and the fact that the physical artifact is not easily accessible outside the dissertation. Despite these limitations, the work demonstrates an important principle of academic design research: a practical artifact should not exist only as a demonstration of technical ability, but should function as a way of investigating and critically testing a research argument. This is ultimately what makes Chung’s project a valuable example of research through design.

Over the last months, this project focused on researching the user experience at German train stations and identifying opportunities for improvement. The process combined research, design, prototyping, and user testing in order to better understand the needs, frustrations, and expectations of travelers.

A major part of the project were two prototypes, that were developed to explore possible solutions for improving the train station experience. They helped translate theoretical insights into practical concepts and allowed ideas to be tested in a more tangible way. Through the design process, it became clear how important accessibility, clarity, and intuitive navigation are within busy public transport environments. The prototypes were both tested with users to validate them. These sessions provided valuable feedback and revealed both strengths and weaknesses of the project vision. Observing users interact with the concepts helped identify usability issues and highlighted areas that required further refinement. The testing phase showed how essential direct user involvement is when designing for public spaces and services.

The final task of this research phase was the creation of a video documenting the progress made throughout the project. The video brought together the different stages of the process, from early research and observations to prototype development and user testing. It served not only as a summary of the work completed, but also as a reflection on the learning experience and the development of the project over time.

Overall, this part of the project provided valuable insights into user-centered design and the complexity of improving public transport experiences. It demonstrated the importance of continuous research, iteration, and testing in creating meaningful and practical design solutions.

References

Videos used from https://www.pexels.com/de-de/

Prototype Setup

After the last iteration phase, the idea and plan for an experience prototype were developed in order to test the concept of a light-guiding system that could be implemented at German train stations through overhead projection. The prototype, together with the findings from the testing, was documented, analysed, and evaluated to draw conclusions for the next stages of the project.

The environment in which the prototype was tested was an academic setting during a class focused on prototype testing. In preparation for the testing, the physical setup first had to be constructed within the space. For this purpose, a free area of the room was selected where the prototype could be outlined on the floor using prepared tape. Beforehand, a sketch of the site had been created, which could now be translated into the real environment. Using tape, two large rectangles were constructed to represent the train platform and the train tracks. Next, the exits were marked using smaller rectangles together with signs identifying them as exits. These elements reflected the basic structure commonly found on train platforms in Germany.

In addition to these existing platform elements, new components were introduced to represent the proposed intervention and demonstrate how the final product could improve the user experience. The first additions were two lines indicating the beginning and end of the arriving train. After this, the entrances were marked with four additional lines that created two corridors equipped with arrows to indicate the direction in which passengers should enter and exit the train. Another important part of the setup was the indication of carriage numbers through numerical markers, as well as the addition of a bicycle icon to represent the bike carriage. Finally, letters were added to the exits in order to distinguish different exit points leading towards different directions and destinations. With these elements in place, the setup of the physical prototype was completed.

To document the testing sessions, a tripod and a smartphone were used to record videos of the interactions. Additional photographs were taken for further documentation purposes. To collect feedback after the testing, a station with sticky notes and pens was prepared where participants were invited to leave open feedback regarding their experience, including what they liked, what they found confusing, and what they believed could improve the prototype. The feedback was intentionally kept open-ended because the primary aim of the testing was to observe participants’ behaviour within the environment. The written feedback mainly served as an opportunity to gather additional ideas, comments, and perspectives. Since the product is still in the conceptual phase, changes and redirections are still possible, making further suggestions particularly valuable. With this setup completed, the first round of testing could be conducted.

Testing

For the testing sessions, different participants were recruited, most of whom were students from a variety of academic subjects. The testing was conducted in four rounds with varying group sizes. This variation proved useful because it reflected different situations that can occur on real train platforms, where there are sometimes fewer and sometimes significantly more passengers present.

At the beginning of each session, the project and prototype were briefly introduced and the aim of the testing was explained. Afterwards, participants were divided into two groups: one group representing passengers on the platform and another group representing passengers inside the train. In cases where the participant groups were smaller, all participants took part in both scenarios one after another. Once divided, the platform group received three tasks that they were asked to complete freely within the marked platform area. Participants could position themselves and move throughout the prototype space according to the given tasks. After the first group completed their exercises, the second group was asked to position themselves within the area representing the train tracks and imagine that they were passengers inside a train arriving at the station. They were then given two tasks to complete within the prototype environment.

The instructions given to participants were intentionally kept relatively limited in order to allow users to interpret the situations independently and draw their own conclusions based on the information available within the setup. After the testing sessions, participants were invited to leave written feedback on sticky notes if they had further comments, questions, or suggestions. These feedback notes were later collected for analysis.

Result Analysis

The results of the testing, including the recorded videos, observational notes, and written feedback from participants, were reviewed and analysed in order to gain insights into user behaviour and experiences within the prototype environment.

One observation that stood out during the analysis was the influence of participant numbers on behaviour. Smaller groups were generally able to complete the tasks with fewer problems and less confusion. In contrast, the larger groups experienced greater difficulty following instructions and navigating through the tasks efficiently. This observation reflects real-life conditions, as train stations become increasingly complex and challenging when larger numbers of people occupy the same space at once. The conclusion here is, that the indications at the platform need to be clear enough so that all users can understand and interact with them, no matter how high the occupancy rate of the station is. Another important observation was that the directional lines indicating entrance and exit routes were too small in the prototype setup for many participants to actively follow during the exercises. However, the concept itself was generally understood and positively mentioned in the feedback. The carriage numbers also caused some confusion among participants, as some users were unsure whether the numbers referred to train classes or carriage numbers. This suggests that an alternative form of communication or visual representation may be necessary. A similar issue emerged with the bicycle icon intended to indicate the carriage for passengers travelling with bicycles or larger objects. Although participants understood the symbol itself, they were uncertain whether the carriage was exclusively intended for bicycles or if it could also accommodate strollers and similar items. The additional information provided at the exits was generally well understood. However, observations showed that clearer pathways towards the exits would be beneficial. It also became apparent that further consideration is needed regarding how boarding passengers and exiting passengers can move without obstructing one another.

Another piece of feedback that stood out was the suggestion to introduce designated waiting and boarding zones on the platform. Participants felt that this could reduce confusion and improve the organisation of the available space. This idea will therefore be considered further and may become an additional feature within the proposed guidance system. Overall, the testing results were highly valuable and insightful, providing many opportunities for further research, refinement, and development within the project.

Information Gathered

This testing process represented a completely new experience for me, as I had never previously worked with an experience prototype and therefore did not know what to expect from either the process or the results. However, the testing exceeded my expectations and provided a large number of insights that would not have been possible to gain from a purely digital prototype. Observing participants directly within the physical environment made the experience feel significantly closer to reality and helped reveal both possibilities and challenges that the final product could face within an actual train station setting. The testing therefore played an important role in improving my understanding of how users interact with the concept and how the idea could continue to develop in the future.

Next Steps

This testing phase marked the final step within this chapter of research and completed the first attempt at creating a functional and testable prototype for the intended project. The information gathered throughout this stage of the research process can now be carried forward into the next phase of development. The upcoming work will focus on exploring the technical feasibility in greater depth, making the final product concept more tangible and realistic, and continuing to test and refine future ideas and iterations of the project.

The next step in this project is to define my project outcome in greater detail and assess the feasibility of my idea. Once this direction has been established, the following phase of the prototype will focus on preparing and refining the testing process. The intended medium fidelity prototype will be the final step for this section of research and will hopefully provide new insights and results for the chapter of investigation surrounding this topic.

Solution Vision

Over the past year, I have explored the topic of train stations in Germany and investigated how the User Experience could be improved for travellers. This process has involved a combination of online research, surveys, prototyping, and user testing. Through these activities, I have gradually narrowed the scope of the project, shifting my focus from the broader train station environment to the more specific and manageable context of the platform itself. This refinement has allowed me to concentrate on a smaller physical space while still addressing a wide range of possible interactions. The first round of testing played a significant role in shaping the direction of the project. It provided valuable insights into the structure of the problem and highlighted the needs and expectations of participants. One of the key findings was the recurring desire for additional information and clearer guidance. Participants expressed that more support during moments of uncertainty would improve their experience and help them navigate the station environment more confidently. These findings encouraged me to explore solutions that respond directly to these needs and contribute to a more intuitive and supportive travel experience.

The vision for this project is to investigate how light can function as a flexible and adaptive orientation system on the platforms of German train stations. Through my research, I found that the information currently available on platforms often needs to be translated into forms of interaction that better respond to users’ changing needs. Rather than relying solely on fixed signs and static displays, this project explores how light itself could become a medium for communication and guidance. Light offers several characteristics that make it particularly suitable for this purpose. It can be switched on and off when needed, adjusted in brightness and opacity, directed towards specific areas, and adapted to different situations. This flexibility creates the possibility of an orientation system that is not tied to a single location but can change according to the circumstances of the station environment. In addition to its practical function, light can influence how people perceive and experience a space by contributing to atmosphere, increasing comfort, and enhancing the feeling of safety, particularly during the evening.

I imagine the concept as a series of lighting panels integrated into the ceilings above the train platforms. During regular operation, these panels could provide ambient illumination for the station. However, when additional information is required, they could transform into an active guidance system, communicating directly with passengers through dynamic visual cues. The lighting system could extend across the entire platform, offering invitations or directions tailored to different trains and routes. Rather than requiring travellers to search for static signs, information could appear exactly where it is needed. For example, the light could indicate where a train will arrive, guide passengers towards the correct boarding area, or highlight the most efficient path through the platform. It could also adapt to changes in real time, responding to delays, platform alterations, or varying passenger flows.

Technical Feasibility

At this phase of the project, the technical feasibility can only be estimated and will require further investigation and planning at a later stage of the process. However, the proposed technical setup of using ceiling-mounted projectors to display objects and wayfinding systems onto the floor is not a new invention and has already been implemented in a variety of contexts. One example is the entrance area of Accenture Dienstleistungen GmbH at their location in Essen, Germany. In this project, projectors mounted on lighting tracks were used to display text and arrows on the floor in order to support orientation within the space (derksen lichttechnik, 2020). Another example is the development of personalised wayfinding and guidance systems for elderly people in private homes. This project, initiated by the University of Applied Sciences Vorarlberg in Austria in 2012, aimed to support elderly people in their spatial orientation and improve their independent mobility (Kempter, 2012).

Although these examples were implemented in environments very different from a train platform, they demonstrate that projector technology capable of displaying guidance systems already exists and is actively being used. They also illustrate that such systems can be customised and adapted to the needs of individual users. Furthermore, they show that relatively simple interventions can enhance a space and improve the experience of navigating through it.

Prototype Iteration

To test this idea not only through a digital prototype but also in a real-life setting, the development of an experience prototype is planned as the next step. This type of prototype makes it possible to move beyond testing interactions on a screen and instead simulate the user experience, including emotions, pain points, behaviours, and physical interactions (Medium, 2025).

Planning for Conduction

The prototype is planned to be tested within an academic setting using students as participants. This environment is not ideal, as it does not represent the full diversity of users found in German train stations. However, considering the opportunities currently available and the limitations of time and resources, this testing phase can still serve as a valuable first step in understanding users’ reactions to the proposed setup. At a later stage, the testing could be repeated with a broader and more diverse participant group in order to further validate the findings and gain a wider range of insights. Nevertheless, the planned study already provides an opportunity to test the concept at an early stage without requiring a significant investment of time or money, while allowing the prototype to be implemented quickly in a controlled environment.

Preparations for the testing include mapping the space that will represent the train platform, preparing the materials that will be provided to participants, writing the instructions for the testing procedure, and planning the camera setup used to document the sessions. To build the prototype environment, sticky tape, markers, and sticky notes will be used. A rectangle constructed from tape on the floor of the testing room will represent the train platform. A second rectangle positioned alongside it will represent the train tracks. Participants will be instructed to remain within the platform area and avoid entering the space representing the tracks. In addition to these spatial boundaries, the prototype setup will include coloured lines and symbols representing the projected light elements that would eventually be integrated into the platform environment. These elements will indicate where the train is expected to stop, where the train doors will be located, designated areas for boarding and alighting passengers, and the position of the bicycle carriage on the platform. Once participants enter the prototype environment, they will be given a number of tasks to complete within the setup. At the end of the testing session, they will receive sticky notes on which they can record their thoughts, identify problems, suggest improvements, and add any additional wishes or ideas they may have. If time allows, the prototype will be tested with two to three groups consisting of three to five participants each. This approach would make it possible to observe different group dynamics and collect feedback from a larger number of users, providing a broader range of opinions and ideas for future development.

Information Gathered

The process of defining the idea for the final outcome in greater detail has been an important step within this project. By examining both the concept itself and its technical feasibility more closely, I have gained a clearer understanding of the direction of the project and what I aim to achieve by its conclusion.

In addition, the planned experience prototype will provide valuable insights into whether the proposed idea can function within a real physical environment. It offers the opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses early in the process and to assess how users respond to the concept before investing further resources into its development.

Next Steps

The next stage of the project will involve conducting the physical prototype testing, filming and documenting the sessions, and collecting feedback and suggestions for improvement from participants. Once the testing has been completed, the findings will be analysed, written up, and documented. The outcomes of this phase of the project will also be summarised in a video format. Both the written documentation and the video can then serve as a foundation for the next chapter of the project, supporting further research, additional testing, and continued development of the concept.

Bibliography

derksen lichttechnik. (29. September 2020). Guidance system and lighting design in the Accenture office. Von derksen lichttechnik: https://www.derksen.de/en/projekt/guidance-system-and-lighting-design-in-the-accenture-office/ abgerufen

Kempter, P. D. (01. May 2012). GUIDING LIGHT. Von AAL: https://www.aal-europe.eu/projects/guidinglight/ abgerufen

Medium. (2. July 2025). Experience Prototyping: Blending Physical, Digital & Spatial Elements. Von Medium : https://medium.com/@harsh.mudgal_27075/experience-prototyping-blending-physical-digital-spatial-elements-74a7257bfbc9 abgerufen

At the beginning of this research phase, a low-fidelity prototype was developed to evaluate whether users could understand the project’s context and purpose based on a very simple visual representation. Initial testing showed promising results, as all participants correctly identified the scenario as a train station environment. Based on these findings, I decided to continue working with the existing low-fidelity prototype while conducting further research and user testing.

Goal and approach

The primary objective of this study was to identify what additional information, guidance, and support users consider helpful when traveling by train and navigating railway platforms in Germany. The prototype was intentionally kept at an early stage of development to encourage creativity and open-ended feedback from participants. Rather than directing users toward predefined solutions, I aimed to provide a flexible testing environment that would allow for unexpected ideas and alternative approaches to emerge. Since the final form of the intended product had not yet been defined, maintaining openness to new insights and potential changes in direction was considered essential. The overall goal of the testing process was to gain a deeper understanding of user needs and to explore how these needs could be addressed through an effective design solution.

Prototype

As this represented both the first prototype and the first round of user testing, the prototype remained in a low-fidelity state. The prototype was created and tested using Miro. The interface consisted of simple lines and geometric shapes forming the outline of a train platform with two tracks. A simplified train shape was positioned on the right side of the platform to represent an approaching train. To increase realism and improve orientation, platform sections labeled A, B, and C were included, reflecting common signage found on German railway platforms. Additional rectangles and squares were used to indicate stairways and elevators. Furthermore, a set of design elements was provided for participants to use during the testing session. These elements included icons, shapes, and lines that could be freely placed, modified, or expanded upon.

Prior to the testing sessions, I also created an example interface based on my own assumptions regarding what information might be useful for travelers. This served as a visual record of my initial design ideas and later enabled a comparison between my assumptions and the solutions proposed by participants.

Testing

To gather insights and evaluate initial design assumptions, the prototype was tested with five participants from my personal network. All participants were experienced train travelers in Germany. The testing sessions were conducted individually on a laptop, and each participant received the same initial prototype setup.

The first task required participants to position themselves on the platform by placing their cursor at the location where they would wait if they intended to board the arriving train. Most participants selected a position near the center of the platform. When asked about their reasoning, they explained that without knowing the exact stopping position of the train, standing in the middle would allow them to move efficiently toward either end of the platform if necessary.

The second task asked participants to use the provided elements to add information, guidance, or explanatory features to the train platform environment. Participants were informed that they could freely modify existing elements, create new ones, and place information either on the platform or on the approaching train itself. While participants could ask for clarification regarding the task, no further restrictions or guidance were provided. The resulting designs differed considerably in terms of creativity, visual language, use of elements, time invested, and overall outcomes.

Participant 1

The first participant adopted a highly minimalist approach. Their primary focus was on platform exits and onward connections. Icons were added to indicate stairs, elevators, and transfer options such as subway and tram connections. No colors, shapes, or additional lines were used.

Participant 2

The second participant focused initially on differentiating train sections and communicating this information on both the train and the platform. Colored areas and icons were used for this purpose. Additional platform information, including stairs, elevators, walking directions, and information points, was also incorporated. Finally, safety markings were added along the platform edge to increase awareness of approaching trains. This participant made use of all provided design elements.

Participant 3

The third participant began by enriching the platform with informational icons. Particular attention was given to identifying different train entrances. Matching icons were then placed on both the train and the platform to establish a clear relationship between the two. This participant exclusively relied on icons and did not use colors or additional shapes.

Participant 4

The fourth participant also started by adding icons to communicate information about sections, exits, and designated areas. To improve differentiation between information categories, colors were introduced. One icon was added to the train, although not all platform icons were mirrored on the train itself. This participant made use of all available element types.

Participant 5

The final participant added icons to indicate exits, meeting points, and train sections. Corresponding icons were then placed on the train. Additionally, this participant considered the distinction between first-class and second-class compartments and represented these areas through color coding, arrows, and platform markings. Similar to Participants 2 and 4, all available design elements were utilized.

Results and consideration

A comparison of the resulting interfaces reveals significant differences in design approaches. In particular, the use of colors and shapes varied substantially among participants, ranging from no use at all to extensive integration throughout the interface. Despite these differences, one design element remained remarkably consistent: the use of icons. All participants relied on icons to communicate important information and to establish connections between platform locations and train sections. Comparing the participant-generated designs with the initial concept created prior to testing also provided valuable insights. Interestingly, none of the participants considered indicating the train’s exact stopping position or its start and end locations on the platform. Similarly, no participant suggested dedicated boarding and alighting guidance systems. Some similarities emerged regarding the use of colored areas to distinguish train sections. Furthermore, the use of corresponding icons on both the platform and the train appeared consistently across several solutions.

These findings provide valuable indications of user priorities, reveal which design ideas appear intuitive to users, and identify areas where further validation is required.

Information Gathered

Overall, this testing phase contributed significantly to my understanding of how experienced train travelers perceive navigation and information systems within railway environments. The study demonstrated that users approach the same problem in diverse ways and often propose solutions that differ considerably from the designer’s initial assumptions. At the same time, recurring patterns emerged, particularly regarding the importance of clear visual information and the use of icons as navigational aids. These insights provide a strong foundation for future design decisions and further development of the concept.

Next Steps

Based on the findings of this study, the next phase will focus on refining the product vision and defining the intended solution more precisely. Additional research into the technical feasibility of the identified concepts will be conducted, followed by the development of a higher-fidelity prototype that incorporates the most promising findings from this testing phase. 

Picture the situation: You’re at a train station and there’s so much going on. You may be at the wrong part of the platform or it’s crowded and getting in and out of the train is very complicated. You may be limited physically so you cannot even board the train or you have heavy luggage or a bike with you. That’s a problem that occurs on many train stations around Europe but especially in Germany. There are missing cues for communication and support for stress-free and efficient structure.

The idea that I have to solve this problem is a leading system that would be integrated into the platform that would make orientation, understanding and a barrier-free use much easier. The USP is very simple, it’s not there yet. There is information and a leading system happening at the moment but it’s often handled with signs which can be insufficient or wrong. The information is there but it’s normally more in an app or on paper and not in a physical space visible.

And why I want to take on this problem is because I am also going on trains a lot of the time, traveling a lot via train and I want to solve this problem because it would help a lot of people and also an interaction designer and a media designer that wants to take on this challenge.