MARTA Public Transit Interactive System
Creating an interactive kiosk to help riders with wayfinding
Context
A semester-long project conducting with a focus on research and evaluation of a 65 inch kiosk screen for new BRT stations.
Outcome
Delivered a high fidelity prototype that is being shipped across 10 MARTA stations
Who is
?
MARTA is Atlanta's public transit system that combines bus, rail, and streetcar services.
It is the 8th largest transit system in the US and serves almost 400,000 people daily.
What is Bus Rapid Transit?
BRT is a transit system that uses buses to provide efficient and reliable service. It includes features like dedicated lanes, traffic signal priority, and enhanced stations.
MARTA is implementing its first BRT system connecting parts of downtown Atlanta, and construction will start in the summer of 2025.
Since the BRT lines do not exist yet, we based our research on existing MARTA bus and train riders. We used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods for problem discovery.
Problem Discovery and User Research
Ethnographic Observations
We wanted to understand the context and environment where users make decisions.
We conducted ethnographic observations at 3 different train, bus, and streetcar stations.
We observed how riders were making decisions by looking at screens at the stations and when they asked for help or looked for information on their phone.
However, we couldn't ask users why they made certain decisions.
We examined the extensive data gathered from a variety of sources to understand the typical experiences of riders and to spot opportunities for innovation for a brand new transport line coming to MARTA.
interviews
survey
ethnography
comparison
context
The black box of affinity mapping*
[*+ feasability, time, enthusiasm, skills ]
THEMES!
.jpg)
What did our research say?
MARTA's current ride experience presents riders with excessive information in isolated silos, causing them to miss out on real-time contextual information, which can disrupt their trip.
But who is our user?
The Tourist
Characteristics:
Visiting Atlanta and using the MARTA system for the first time for tourism.
Travels during non-peak hours to avoid crowds.
Core needs:
Understand bus route, cost, and general geographic information to feel confident in using the MARTA BRT line.
The Resident
Characteristics:
Non-native English speaker and relies on acquired knowledge to navigate.
Uses MARTA buses to get to work and hence travels during peak rush hours.
Core needs:
Know arrival and departure timings of bus and train to be able to transfer in time.
Understand signage and ask questions.
Problem Statement
How might we provide a range of riders with relevant information at the right time to help them complete key user actions?
Ideation Round #1
Through our initial round of ideation, we identified three key design requirements.
01
Information needed to plan the trip must be easily visible and/or discoverable.
02
Riders should be given a clear visual representation of their current location and destination to navigate the system effectively.
03
There should be affordance created to promote local tourism for casual riders like tourists.
When we conducted a Participatory Design workshop with our initial ideas, we found that all our participants gravitated toward using a graphical map as a central focus.
"These points of interest around the map are very engaging".
"Live Tracking is a very handy feature and must be prioritized."
"Service Alerts are very time-sensitive and need to be shown at all times."
Breakthrough
We realized that we could use the transit map as an anchor to convey contextual information to the riders throughout their journey.
Next, we built a framework to incorporate all the features we had identified as important with the map as the central piece. We also did a bunch of whiteboard drawings to understand the scale and placement of various features.
Brainstorming on large whiteboard to understand scale.
Mapping out functions of the system
Mid-fidelity prototype to test functionality and structure. This prototype was tested on a 55-inch screen.
User Testing #1
Our user testing sessions highlighted various strengths and weaknesses in the system.
01
Incorporating the map of all MARTA lines felt overwhelming and confusing.
02
Reorganize information into consolidated and meaningful groups that require less searching.
03
Make sure interactivity or lack thereof is clearly conveyed to users
04
Reduce the amount of input required from users.
Exploring Map Interactions
User Need
Want to spend <5 minutes to plan an accurate trip
Affordance
Users can plan their route and see it reflected on the interactive map
Updates
Deescalated the feature to match user preferences.
Allowed users to continue the journey on their personal devices.
User Need
Want to know the next incoming bus location.
Affordance
Live Track feature for all buses and trains.
Updates
Prioritized this feature based on user feedback.
Made the current route bus tracking visible by default.
Stakeholder Need
Want to promote local tourism
Affordance
User can explore nearby tourist spots as well as local businesses.
Updates
Made it easier to explore local businesses and allowing users to read up on local tourist spots.
User Need
Make sense of the overwhelming route map.
Affordance
Allow users to highlight various lines and stops as per their needs.
❌
Updates
This feature was scrapped and folded into other points through the journey since it did not test well with our users.
Exploring Quick Actions
Affordance
Consolidated different user needs under one 'Rider Needs' menu.
Brought 'Station Info', 'Civic Resources', and 'MARTA at a glance' to quick actions as these provide important resources for various MARTA users.
Ideation Round #2
For this round we concentrated on making meaningful 'Quick Actions' and 'Map Interactions' menu items.
Task based Cognitive Walkthroughs
Evaluation Efforts
%20(1).jpg)
_heic.png)
We chose to base our testing on tasks to identify problems in frequently completed activities accurately. We timed our users and recorded their preferred pathways.
Check the weather and then find a place to visit near your destination.
Time to complete: 54.5 secs
Number of steps: 5.5
Number of errors: 0.5
Look up how to get from your current station to Peachtree Center.
Time to complete: 113.75 secs
Number of steps: 4.25
Number of errors: 0.25
Check where the bus is on Route 2 and what is its bus number.
Time to complete: 32.75 secs
Number of steps: 3.5
Number of errors: 0.5
Find out how to put your bike on the bus.
Time to complete: 17 secs
Number of steps: 2
Number of errors: 0
Find an alternative way to buy your ticket instead of ticket kiosk.
Time to complete: 25.5 secs
Number of steps: 2.5
Number of errors: 0.25
Adjust the screen height to a comfortable height for you for browsing.
Time to complete: 21 secs
Number of steps: 2
Number of errors: 0
Heuristic Evaluations
We visited the MARTA HQ in Lindbergh and presented our designs to 5 experts in the Customer Technology department. We asked our experts to evaluate our designs against 3 heuristics as outlined by NN/g. Each heuristic had 9-11 subcategories.
Match between the prototype and users' mental models
This heuristic evaluates how well the prototype speaks the user’s language, with words, phrases, and concepts familiar to a user, rather than system-oriented terms.
Consistency and Navigational Clarity
This heuristic evaluates how well the prototype facilitates user flow with a consistent layout and consequent naming.
Simple Information Architecture
This heuristic evaluates how well the system provides the user with the exact information that is needed and in the right place.
%20(1).jpg)
The prototype hides the details of the software’s internal workings (that the user has no control over) well.
The current user location within the system and the flow is not clearly indicated (e.g. breadcrumbs)
The prototype is average at precisesly drilling down the information and filtering.
Users can easily get back to the Main Window or a relevant start point.
The prototype is below average in performing obvious actions automatically, without prior user confirmation.
Text and content are legible with good typography and visual contrast.
The prototype's content is average at following an inverted pyramid structure.
Learnings and Takeaways
Our collaboration with MARTA ended at this stage with recommendations and next steps. Our designs were taken over by the team to implement at all their stations. This was an immense learning experience in user testing for me. I wanted to highlight some key take aways from this project.
%20(1).jpg)
.jpg)
1. Talk to users early and often
Throughout the semester, our team maintained regular communication with MARTA's Riders Advisory Council and other MARTA users. This engagement not only facilitated valuable feedback on our concepts but also involved users in the ideation process. This approach allowed us to validate our ideas early on, minimizing the risk of investing excessive time in potentially flawed concepts and promptly identifying usability issues. The success of our project was greatly influenced by the invaluable insights gained through user testing.
2. Consider the physical context in design
Our solution focused on utilizing a 65-inch screen at BRT stations for information delivery, posing unique challenges. Prototyping on a 13-inch laptop with Figma did not effectively translate to the larger screen. Physical prototyping on whiteboards and testing on 65-inch screens proved crucial in understanding the usability of our prototype in its intended context. Considerations such as the screen's size and placement informed decisions related to user input and privacy concerns.
3. Align with user journeys and information needs
Initially encountering issues of information overload and user confusion, we realized the importance of understanding the user's journey and their specific information needs. For instance, users found the display of the entire map of Atlanta's transit system at BRT stations confusing. We adapted our approach to focus on providing users with relevant information in real time, addressing their immediate needs, and minimizing unnecessary complexity.
4. Address accessibility in public systems
Given MARTA's diverse commuter base, our solution aimed to be inclusive for users with varying levels of knowledge about Atlanta and MARTA, as well as those with specific needs such as wheelchair users and non-native English speakers. Proactively considering these factors from the outset, guided by feedback from MARTA and users, enabled us to prioritize accessibility in our design rather than treating it as an afterthought.