RESEARCH / DESK RESEARCH

 RESEARCH / USER RESEARCH

I interviewed five 18-35-year-old individuals who identified as Asian Americans that have previously sought out mental health care.

Mental health struggles are difficult to address and deal with.

Based on the trends from affinity diagramming, I was surprised by how similar the experiences my interviewees had with mental health were.

I wanted to further understand them by uncovering their goals and frustrations through empathy maps and defining my user personas.

Although there were many overlaps amongst all the interviewees, I noticed two distinct patterns:

Meet the Naysayer and the Go-getter– both desire mental health care but one has a hard time engaging in it, while the other is actively seeking help.

• The Naysayer is inexperienced and apprehensive when it comes to mental health care, but still believes it is valuable.

• The Go-Getter is experienced and more comfortable with mental health care but is becoming frustrated by how hard it is to find a counselor she can feel safe with.

 RESEARCH / COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

The competition can make it difficult for users to know where or how to start the process of seeking mental health care.

I learned that all of these sites provide mental health resources, such as a dictionary for mental health terms and articles about them, but 2 out of the 4 sites didn’t explain how to find mental health care.

 IDEATION

I ideated solutions through establishing a Point of View, “How Might We” statements, brain dumping, laddering, and user stories to further identify with my users to solve what they need. I determined that the MVP (Minimum Viable Product) was a “Find a therapist”* feature and developed a sitemap to help me get an overview of how my users would navigate through my site.

*therapist and counselor are used interchangeably

REEVALUATE

I realized I had never defined a solution after I prematurely created a user flow for my red route.

At this point in my project, my solution was not only too broad but it wasn’t any different than what currently existed. I had to ask myself, how am I directly addressing the needs of MY users? I had to reevaluate my user research in what needed to be addressed.

I put myself in the shoes of my two personas again:

• As an inexperienced newcomer to the mental health care world, I want to learn about the options available so that I can find the help that I need.

• As a previous participant in receiving counseling, I want to find a better counselor so that I can maintain and care for my mental health. 

My solution was to create an online mental health service featuring options to guide users to find a provider suitable for them, easily set appointments, provide mental health resources, and provide a community that normalizes mental health and reduces stigma.

REEVALUATE / COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS (AGAIN)

Now that I clarified my solution, I conducted another competitive analysis. My previous competitive analysis was useful in that I learned how the sites help users find mental health care, but they were not specific enough to the solution that I defined. I kept two of the previous sites that I believed provided solutions similar to mine and added three more sites, two of which I discovered for the first time.

The competition offers helpful, yet incomplete mental health care solutions. What if each of their best features could be combined into one product that serves as a one-stop shop for users?

So that’s what I did.

USER FLOWS

The updated solution and competitive analysis helped me create two user flows to meet the needs of my users:

• I would like to be matched with a mental health care provider.

• I would like to select my own mental health care provider.

I continued with the MVP of “Find a therapist” for the user flows.

WIREFRAMING / TESTING

I sketched basic lo-fi wireframes so that I could conduct guerilla testing with immediate feedback before investing too many details that users may not need. The testing was conducted with five users in MarvelApp.

Guerilla testing revealed that users like to have options catered to their specific needs with resources to inform their next steps and provide a sense of control.

The greatest change I made was shifting to a mobile-first design for user convenience.

3 out of 5 testers performed the test on Mobile instead of Desktop, so I made the change to a mobile-first design. Users also asked for more instruction and information so I added detail to the “Log in/Sign up” flow as well the “Therapist profile” for my mid-fi wireframes.

To test the mid-fi wireframes, I used Figma’s prototyping tool and repeated the same structure as my guerilla testing with five users. I wanted to check the ease of navigability in the new layouts and identify any usability errors.

VISUALS + UI

Before developing the hi-fi mockup, I created two mood boards to determine how I wanted my users to feel when using the product. I explored the psychology behind colors and compared wellness brands and products. As I compared existing products, I concluded that calming, soft colors were outdated.

Since my users are younger in the 18-35 age range and seeking to step out of the stigma of mental health passed on from previous generations—

I landed on a modern, fresh feel for the look.

FINAL PRODUCT

For the hi-fi mockup, I revised the UI and features based on the users’ feedback to make the navigation smoother with minimal distractions.

My next steps would be to conduct more usability testing to check how users receive the colors and design of the product, as well as any more usability errors.

REFLECTION

Takeaways + What I would do differently

• It’s okay to pause and reevaluate

  • After I created that premature red route, I found myself majorly stuck. Although I had learned that the design process is not always a linear path, I believe I had to experience this on my own to make me a better designer. I had to learn how to take steps backward in order to take stronger steps forward practicing analytical thinking and strategy. This taught me the value of being able to identify my mistakes and iteration to create stronger solutions.

• We love user research

  • The reason why I believe I got stuck and needed to reevaluate was because I had strayed away from working off of my user research and instead relied on my own opinions. UX design is all about the user, so the user needs to be at the focus at every step of the project.

• Keep work neat and organized

  • Since this was my first project and case study, I have learned ways to keep my files more organized for later use… especially if/when steps need to be revisited. Also, I would have made my sketches neater. They were good enough to capture the core of the product for users to understand, but knowing what I know now, they could have been neater.

• Deadlines are imperative (and let go of perfection!)

  • I found myself repeatedly trying to make every step “perfect,” which meant that I would often push back my timeline. The reality of real design work is that there will be time constraints and also, the idea of perfection in the UX design process is silly. Only when we progress can we begin to iterate to create the strongest solution. So, in hindsight, I would have implemented stricter deadlines for quicker progression.