Introduction：

 

The Evaluation plan was divided into two parts. First, we invited 5 users to test for the usability and interactive experience of Prototype 1.0 through interviews. After obtaining the evaluation results, we reconsidered the parts of the prototype that need to be modified and added. Then we designed the prototype 2.0. Next, we continued to conduct evaluation tests using Prototype 2.0 and considered accessibility and sustainability.

 

 

Usability：

 

In the first usability, we designed 23 questions based on 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design and conducted a preliminary evaluation of our Prototype1.0 through structured interviews. We invited 5 users to conduct feedback tests. In this test, we found that protocol 1.0 has 11 places to be modified or supplemented (such as lack of secondary confirmation button, lack of user freedom, etc.), and some features worth keeping. Therefore, we made 9 targeted adjustments to prototype 1.0 (for details, see the Evaluation Plan and appendix).

 

In the first test, our shortcomings are: 1. The diversity of respondents is insufficient. 2. No accessibility and sustainability evaluation plans.

 

Then we did a second user test based on prototype2.0. This time we used semi-structured interviews and pre-designed questions as the main idea. Respondents were asked to use prototype 2.0 freely for feedback. Respondents had a certain diversity compared to the previous one. They ranged in age from different age group. Also, we have considered accessibility this time.

 

The results we got in this test are as follows:

1. The interface of prototype 2.0 is too simple and needs to beautify.

2. Add more user-defined features, such as background color customization.

3. For older users (49-51 years old), the design purpose and function of this app cannot be well understood.

4. People with visual disability (color blind) would not be affected during using this app.

5. The text description layout is unreasonable and affects the overall simplicity.

 

In response to this conclusion, we made some adjustments to the prototype 2.0Added images to make the prototype 2.0 more beautiful and vivid; added user-defined functions; slightly reduced the text description. (appendix for more details).

 

 

Accessibility：

 

Due to objective reasons, we only invited a respondent with visual disability (color blind) to test for accessibility and usability. There are no complicated graphics and colors in the app that need to be recognized and understood, so the user thinks he can use the app without restrictions.

 

For other people, the mood enhancer is a mobile app that requires a simple operation, so the app doesn't require excessive physical effort.

 

The mood enhancer can also provide voice interactive commands, which can be operated by voice only, so that people with severe visual impairments can also use it freely.

 

For people with emotional disorders and social disabilities, mood enhancer is a software that provides emotional comfort, so it is also suitable.

 

However, because the mood enhancer is designed to obtain the user's voiceprint and play music, this app is not suitable for people with hearing and vocal disorders.

 

 

Sustainability：

 

Mood Enhancer can import song lists from other music apps to help users personalize their music library. Mood enhancer will work with mainstream music apps to create a cloud library based on sentiment classification through user feedback.

 

Mood Enhancer will be intelligently optimized according to the user's feedback during the use process, and the algorithm will be used to recommend music that is more in line with their wishes. This continually optimized process can entice users to continue to use the app.

 

Mood Enhancer is suitable for mobile phones and pads of various models and operating systems.

 

The Mood Enhancer support team conducts regular user surveys and continuously updates the features and information in app.

 

 

Work Breakdown：