ṫɨnnɨṫus

Home

Selected Works

ṫɨnnɨṫus

Home

Selected Works

Where in the ATL?

Building Interactive Signages for the new BRT

The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) is a vital public transit system serving the metropolitan Atlanta area. As part of MARTA 2040, Summerhill Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) started construction in the summer of 2023. Summerhill BRT is a 5-mile dedicated bus route which will establish a transit link, connecting Downtown Atlanta to the Capitol Gateway, Summerhill, Peoplestown, and the Atlanta BeltLine. In the pursuit of improving customer experience, MARTA envisions the deployment of digital signage at Summerhill BRT encompassing functions such as ticket vending, digital screens displaying service alerts, bus schedules, and route maps.

How might we help

MARTA BRT riders

find the

information they need

for their journey via

digital signage

Trip Planning

Information Guide

Language Barrier

Accessibility

Cross-Platform Consistency

First-Time Users

What do users want for the new interactive signages?

Ethnographic Observation

Semi-structured Interview

Contextual Inquiry

Survey

Comparative Analysis

Affinity Mapping

We selected 5 research methods during the research phase.

Ethnographic Observation:

3 Bus Stops

How do people currently behave at MARTA bus stations?

What are the current services provided at MARTA bus stations?

What are the contexts where users make decisions?

Contexts where users make decisions

Ethnography:

3 Bus Stops

Current user behaviors at bus stations

Current services at bus stations

What are the contexts where users make decisions?

Contexts where users make decisions

Contextual
Inquiry:

3 Participants

How do people currently behave at MARTA bus stations?

What are the current services provided at MARTA bus stations?

What are the contexts where users make decisions?

Unexpected scenarios outside interviews

Contextual Inquiry:

3 Participants

Issues encountered when buying a ticket

Users' experiences during the ride

What are the contexts where users make decisions?

Unexpected scenarios outside interviews

Semi-structured Interview:

4 Participants

Drill down on specific behaviors or habits observed from other research activities.

4 Participants

Drill down on specific behaviors or habits observed from other research activities.

Comparative
Analysis:

How is MARTA BRT different from other BRTs in the world ?

4 Cases

Comparative
Analysis:

How is MARTA BRT different from other BRTs in the world ?

4 Cases

Survey:

186 Participants

Who are the users of MARTA?

What are users' general preferences?

What are users' ratings of the current systems?

What assisting tools do users use for MARTA rides?

What is the hardest part of the journey?

What user wishes are not currently fulfilled?

What are users' ratings of the current systems?

What assisting tools do users use for MARTA rides?

What is the hardest part of the journey?

What user wishes are not currently fulfilled?

Survey:

186 Participants

Who are the users of MARTA?

What are users' general preferences?

What are users' ratings of the current systems?

What assisting tools do users use for MARTA rides?

What is the hardest part of the journey?

What user wishes are not currently fulfilled?

What are users' ratings of the current systems?

What assisting tools do users use for MARTA rides?

What is the hardest part of the journey?

What user wishes are not currently fulfilled?

What do users want for the new interactive signages?

One complicating factor on the path to our goal is that the BRT bus line does not currently exist and thus does not have active riders. Therefore, we will need to dive deep into the behaviors, thoughts, preferences and frustrations of current MARTA bus and train riders, as both of these transport methods incorporate elements of BRT buses. Although we considered narrowing down the user group, we decided to address the needs of all potential MARTA riders, either local residents or visiting tourists. We're placing a special emphasis on the requirements of new riders because, at some point, everyone in the city will be new BRT riders.

We organized our notes into themes.

Findings Analysis: Service and User Perspectives

A challenge in achieving our goal is that the BRT bus line doesn't yet exist, so there are no active riders. To address this, we'll study the behaviors, preferences, and frustrations of current MARTA bus and train riders, as these share elements with BRT. While we considered narrowing our focus, we chose to address the needs of all potential MARTA riders, with a special focus on new riders, since everyone will eventually be new to the BRT system.

If you ask an experienced rider, they might tell you this:

If you ride with MARTA,
you might also notice these
during your journey.

If you ask a first-time rider,
they might tell you this:

If you ask an experienced rider, they might tell you this:

If you ride with MARTA,
you might also notice these
during your journey.

If you ask a first-time rider,
they might tell you this:

Top Priority

Priority

Essential

Local Atlanta resident

Same old MARTA tasks

What exactly is BRT?

New or old MARTA problems?

Where am I in the city?

No one is here to help

How does ATL public transportation work?

Tourist/visitor

Design Ideations

provide service disruption information in multiple formats and in multiple places.

provide planning details like current time, map, BRT routes, clearly accessible.

include a route map showing bus/train, and transfer points with transfer directions.

add visuals for non-English speakers and an option for Spanish translations.

graphically represent stops so it is easier for users to recognize upon arriving.

direct people to the multiple methods to buy tickets or reload Breeze cards.

Based on research, the design must …

Initial Concept Sketches

Map Interaction

Service Alert

Plan Route

Bus/Train Transfer

So we began with some initial concepts.

After presenting the design requirements to MARTA, each teammate created sketches addressing specific requirements. My focus was on map interaction, emphasizing different levels of detail based on zoom—starting with a citywide overview and narrowing to specific station schedules. Other sketches explored trip planning with phone integration, non-intrusive service alerts, and customizable information displays. To gather feedback, we combined participatory workshops with sketch reviews. Participants shared detailed experiences and provided oral and written feedback. Key takeaways included clarifying unrelated BRT information, prioritizing content hierarchy, and addressing wheelchair accessibility by considering eye-level adjustments and user comfort.

Low-Fidelity Prototype

Feedback Sessions + Analysis

Finalized Concept

Participatory Design Workshop

Analyzing Findings

Finalizing the Information Architecture and Interface Layout

The user feedback session on our initial concepts provided valuable insights that helped us refine the information architecture. The diagram below illustrates the fundamental layout, where each information component aligns with the research-based design requirements. Given the limited timeframe of the school semester, we prioritized a few key user flows to focus on, highlighted with orange borders.

Feedback Session

Testing the Low-fidelity Prototype

This activity focused on evaluating the effectiveness of the prototype by guiding participants through key user tasks from the perspective of a first-time user. Each of the 6 tasks was designed based on the key user flows/scenarios. Participants assessed the prototype based on predefined evaluation guidelines and provide feedback on its functionality, usability, and any issues they identified. We tested our ideas using a 65-inch screen to simulate real interactions, including scenarios for wheelchair users.

Testing Feedback Analysis

Insights were categorized into visual design, accessibility, and information architecture. High-fidelity prototypes should include better contrast, universal icon research, and consistent visual styles. The accessibility features should be designed to make accessibility services easy to locate while ensuring that users feel respected, valued, and not subjected to discrimination or patronization.

Spanish speaker

Close up

Far away

Wheelchair

To address the new findings, we added 3 more design requirements.

graphically represent stops so it is easier for users to recognize upon arriving.

implement visual elements accurately conveying the purposes of the functions.

graphically represent stops so it is easier for users to recognize upon arriving.

Visual Design

graphically represent stops so it is easier for users to recognize upon arriving.

Enable screen size adjustments to accommodate diverse physical abilities.

add visuals for non-English speakers and an option for Spanish translations.

Accessibility

provide service disruption information in multiple formats and in multiple places.

include a route map showing bus/train, and transfer points with transfer directions.

provide planning details like current time, map, BRT routes, clearly accessible.

direct people to the multiple methods to buy tickets or reload Breeze cards.

graphically represent stops so it is easier for users to recognize upon arriving.

place information where users can intuitively find and understand.

Information Architecture

Wireframe Prototype

From Low-Fidelity to Mid-Fidelity

While the fundamental information architecture remained unchanged, improvements were made based on feedback from the low-fidelity prototype, incorporating newly added design requirements. Details of the mid-fidelity prototype are not covered in this section but are documented at the end.

The results of expert and user testing revealed areas where our prototype excelled and others requiring improvement. Overall, the design successfully met our requirements. Users completed tasks with minimal errors, finding the design both discoverable and learnable. Features like Live Tracking and Explore Atlanta received particular praise for their functionality, with users describing the prototype as engaging and expressing eagerness to see it implemented.

However, the prototype had shortcomings. Users often felt disoriented, struggling to identify their current station, map location, and the positions of buses in Live Tracking. Future iterations must improve spatial orientation to ensure clear navigation. Additionally, the design needs better accommodation for diverse accessibility needs, including non-English speakers, users with physical or visual impairments, and those less familiar with technology. Simplifying button names, reducing steps to complete actions, and making map icons interactable can also enhance usability and streamline the interface.