Research programme · Service experience
Autonomous mobility experience
Passengers did not experience a stop, a vehicle and an onboard display as separate products. The research had to follow their journey in the same way.
The journey from arrival to accessible exit, shown as one service rather than separate interfaces.
The whole journey
What did people need to understand and trust an autonomous mobility service across the whole journey?
Information at the stop, vehicle status, boarding controls, route guidance, sound and physical accessibility all affected the same trip. Studying any one of them alone would miss the handovers between them.
Research programme
Map the journey from arrival to accessible exit
- End-to-end study
Evaluate the journey as connected touchpoints
I structured the research from arrival and route selection through boarding, travel, stop requests and accessible exit.
- Focused follow-ups
Use follow-up studies to investigate weak signals
Focused concept evaluations explored onboard information, external communication, feedback and the needs of less familiar users.
- Team sessions
Put recurring issues on the same table
Workshops brought earlier observations into one place so software and physical changes could be discussed together, with their practical constraints.
The whole trip on one page
Boarding, stop requests and exit needed clearer confirmation.
The journey view kept route information, boarding feedback, onboard state and accessible exit connected instead of treating them as separate interfaces.
Across touchpoints
Trust grew during the ride; ambiguity remained at key handovers
Participants valued the service and most felt more confident after the ride. Route information, vehicle state and confirmation of requests still left room for doubt.
- 01
Trust in context
Experience increased confidence, with clear limits
Nine of fourteen participants reported increased trust after the ride, while the controlled setting remained an explicit limitation.
- 02
Information hierarchy
Location, route and state needed stronger distinction
Route maps, vehicle position, stop markers and changing onboard information were not always differentiated clearly enough.
- 03
Action feedback
Stop requests needed confirmation that persisted
Stop controls exposed issues in placement, persistence of feedback and distinction between different requests.
- 04
Accessible exit
Accessible exit controls had their own placement and feedback needs
Placement, persistence of feedback and distinction between requests also affected the accessible exit controls.
What the team could use
The handover crossed software, sound and physical controls
The team received requirements for information hierarchy, route comprehension, state feedback, sound, control placement and accessibility, alongside questions that still needed testing.