Keyfob

FinalAssignmentforHumanfactors.
25/06/2015

MarkdeBoer
LevinPablo
RobinSchmidt

s1500090
s1470884
s1589873

1. Introduction..3

2. InvestigationofthecurrentSituation
2.1.StateoftheArt.....4
2.2.PACTAnalysis
2.2.1.People.......5
2.2.2.Activities...7
2.2.3.Context..8
2.2.4.Technology......9

3.ConceptualDesignanditsheuristicEvaluation
3.1FirstConceptualDesign10
3.2HeuristicEvaluation.......11

4.InteractionProposal..13

5.InterfaceEvaluationwithrepresentativesoftheusergroup
5.1Testsetup..17
5.2Usabilitytestresults...18

6.ConclusionsandRecommendations20

1.Introduction

The goal of this project is to develop a multifunctional keyfob for remote parking,
which can be used by car rental companies for their rentalcars. There already are
cars, which come with an automatic parking function. This parking automation
process however, stillneedstobecontrolledfromtheinsideofthecar.Ourgoalisto
create a viable product that iseasytouseand can be usedbothin,and outside of
the car.The most importantfeaturesthat wehave toincludeareautomatedparking,
unlockingand locking of thedoorsand regulatingof the air conditioning.Safetyand
userfriendliness are both aspects that we have to keep in mind during our design
process.
Ananalysis,investigationof the situation andthedesired future userscenarioletus
come upwith a conceptualmodel.Afteritsheuristicevaluationandexpertreviewwe
improveditwhere neededand formed an interactionproposal,whichwethentested
in an extensiveusabilitytest.Based on the results ofthat testweiteratedandcame
upwiththefinaldesignforourkeyfob.

2.Investigatingofthecurrentsituation

2.1Stateoftheart

Togetabetterunderstandingofthecurrentsituationacoupleofcurrentstateofthe
artparkingsolution/technologieshavebeenexamined:

Figure1BMWnewkeyfobpresentedatCES15

Figure2BMWnewkeyfobinuse

Figure3VWnormalkeyfob

Figure4Volvokeyfob

Figure5Boschparkingassistant

Figure6RangeRoverkeyfobapplication

Also an extensive PACT analysis has been conducted. It consists of four parts
People, Activities, Context and Technology. All the four aspectsarecoveredin the
analysiswedid:

2.2PACTAnalysis

2.2.1People
Togetabetterunderstandingofthepeople/usersofourdesign,wecameupwith
thefollowing4personas:

Mr.Charles
58yearsold
highincomebusinessman
ownsseveralcars
lotsofdrivingexperience

Mr. Charles is a succesful

business man from the
Netherlands. Because of his
work, he travels a lot
throughoutEurope.
He owns several cars and
prefers to drive those. But
when hisbusinessmeetings
are too far away he takes a
plane there and rents a car
attheairport.
Hes been driving his whole
life and has lots of
experience.
Hes
confident
and
experienced enough to park
in almostanysituation.Heis
convinced he doesnt need
the help of a parking
assistant.

Anna
23yearsold
psychologystudent
studentjob+littlesupportbyparents

Anna lives inaflat inAmsterdamwith3

of her friends in Amsterdam. She has
her driving license since she is 18, but
shedoesnotownacar.Sometimesshe
andherfriendsrentacartogethertogo
on a road trip. Generally she is a
confident driver, but sometimes in
hectic situations she gets stressed out.
She is open minded and is curious
aboutnewthings.

JasmijnVanDijk
36yearsold
Worksasasecretary.

She lives with her husband in Den

Haag. They have no children.Together
they own a car. Usuallyherhusband is
driving it, but when necessary she is
drivingtoo.
She uses itmostlytogoshoppinginthe
supermarket. There she parks in an
underground garage with tight corners
andnarrowparkingspots.
Sometimes when their car is at the
service station for a longer period of
timetheyrentacar.

HuangFuDeJong
68yearsold
mediumincomethroughretirement
retired,modest,friendly

Mr. De Jong is a downtoearth man.

He lives in a small house in Hengelo.
His two sons moved out and started
their own family. He sold his car,
because he barely needs one
anymore. Once a year he goes on
holidays with his wife. For that
occasion he always rents a car in
Hengelo to drive to the Airport in
Amsterdam.

2.2.2.Activities:

Our keyfob needs to accomplish a wide variety of tasks. Here are all the tasks in
orderoffrequency(mostfrequenttoleastfrequent):
1.(un)lockingvehicle
2.(un)parkvehicle
3.(un)lockingtrunk
4.opening/closingtrunk
5.controllingtheA/C

The time available to automatically park the car is within a couple of minutes. In
comparison to manually parking the car, the automated process with the keyfob
should be shorter or the same but not longer. Because of safety reasons the
responsetime of thevehicle needs to be very fast (almostinstant).Eventhoughthe
sensor system of the car is supposed to sense the environment and as soon as
there is a possible danger (other car, pedestrian, bicycle etc.) the carstops, but in
addition to that theuserneedstocheckthesurroundingsandinterveneifnecessary.
This intervention is also done with the keyfob and needs to be very quick and
precise.

2.2.3.Context:

The keyfob will be used by a car rental company. This means thatlotsof different
people will be interactingwith ourproduct.Theproductshouldbeintuitiveandeasily
understandable by people of all ages and technical skills. To define some of the
contextsin which the keyfob willbe used, we came upwith fourdifferentscenarios,
oneforeachofourpersonas:

ScenarioMrCharles:
Mr. Charles has apartnershipwithacompanyinBerlin.He visitstheirofficeinBerlin
regularly. Everytime he is in Berlin he goes to the same car renatl company. He
values that the process ofrenting one of theircarsis shortanduncomplicated.Hes
familiarwith the rental cars and doesntwantand needto spendalotoftimetoget
to know the car and its features. Heis technically skilledand usually doesnthave
troublesunderstandingnewtechnologies.

ScenarioAnna:
Anna lives with three of her close friends in a flat, she doesntown acar andonly
drives one occasionally. She lives on the money she gets from her parents in
combination withherstudy finance. Together withherthreeroommatestheyhaveto
take care of themselves, they do the larger groceries once a week usually on a
sunday, for that they use the carof Jenny, one of theroommates. Once every four
weeks its Annas turn. Thats usually the only time she drives a car. However this
summersheplansondoingaroadtripwithher boyfriendthroughEurope.Therefore,
they decide torent a car.She thinks she still needssomepracticesince she willbe
drivinglongsessions.Annaisstillyoungandanearlyadopterofnewtechnologies.

ScenarioMr.DeJong:
Mr. De Jong lives with his wife in Hengelo. Both are modest and downtoearth
people. They decided to do their daily lifewithoutacar,tosavemoney.Onceayear
they visitanother countryby airplane.Whentheytravel,theyalwaysdrivefirsttothe
Amsterdam airport. They are both not very confident drivers, due to their lack of
practice. But thecomfort of a caris of highvalue forthem.Thereforetheyrentacar
for their commute to the airport every year. Since they are both not that skilled in
driving,theylikethe optionto press some buttonsand thecarisparkingonitsown,
buttheyareworriedthattheywillnotknowhowtousethisnewtechnology.

ScenarioMrs.VanDijk:
Mrs. Van Dijk lives withherhusband inDen Haag.He works abitoutside thetown
so he has to use their car on a regular basis. At the moment their car is at the
service station and cannot be used for the next week. That iswhy they rentacar.
Theytookoneoftheselfparkingones,whichcanberemotecontrolled.
Mrs. Van Dijk feels uneasy driving other cars and she also does not want to learn
how todrive withthem.Whentheyhavetopayfor anothercar, she doesnotliketo
be bothered around by difficult interactions with the car. She values simplicity and
intuitivity. If she doesnt understand how to work with something new, she gets
frustrated.
Shedriveswiththecartothegrocerystoreandhastoparkinatightparkinggarage.

2.2.4.Technology:

The technology consists of 2 main systems which can be split up further in

subsystems:

Figure7:Overviewofthekeyfobsystem

3.ConceptualDesignanditsheuristicevaluation

3.1Firstconceptualdesign

After defining the situation of use and the functionalities that the keyfob needs to
have, wecameup with afirstconceptual design.Themainideaisthatthedesignof
the keyfob willbe simplistic and intuitive.Weinclude one buttonin the back, for the
index finger, and one joystick in the front, that is controlled with the thumb. This
joystick also includes a finger scanner to make sure only obligated people can
accessthekeyfob.

Figure8Paperprototypeoftheconceptualmodel

The evidence that we used to base our conceptual model on is based on natural
instincts and intuitivebehaviour of people.First, thedesignof the keyfob is inspired
of the shape of a video game controller. And although a lotof elderly people have
10

never played video games withacontroller, video game controllers are made tobe
understoodandpickedupbytheuseronfirstuse.

Weuseclearandlogicalcolorsfordecisionmaking,alsoweusedcolourmappingso
that the user could make quick and easy actions using physical controls to scroll
through the graphical user interface. If a function is highlighted in green on the
screen, it willbe activatedbythegreenbutton. Theseusecuesensureintuitivityand
userfriendliness.

3.2Heuristicevaluation

In order to assess our designinprogress we did a heuristic evaluation in which a

group of people did a first usability test on our paper prototype. The feedback and
general comments wereceived are extremelyvaluable inorder to createaheuristic
end product. We set up a small list of the main aspects we want to user group to
keepinmindwhiletheyareperformingtheheuristicevaluation.

Evaluation checklist with chosen heuristics we haveaskedthereviewers touse for

theirassessment:
Visibilityofsystemstatus
Matchbetweensystemandtherealworld
Usercontrolandfreedom
Consistencyandstandards
Colourmapping
Errorprevention
Recognitionratherthanrecall
Flexibilityandefficiencyofuse
Aestheticandminimalistdesign
Reasonablesizeandproportions
Helpusersrecognize,diagnose,andrecoverfromerrors
Helpanddocumentation

Hereisashortsummaryofthefeedbackwegotintheheuristicevaluation:
The status of which thesystem is in is clearly visible. Thescreenis not over
packed with information, so its always easyto see whatstep of theprocess
yourein.
The system gives a clear indicationof the real world,especially because the
systemuses a display thatcangivearealtimesatelliteimageofthecarwhile
performingtheparkingaction

11

The user control and freedom is somewhat limited. Theuser cannot choose
between different options for the parking, like for example forward or
backwardsparking.
The paper prototype gives clear indication of the actions that can be
performed. The colors are consistent and bright, every menu has the same
styleandtypeofoperation.
Since there is one button in the back, which is used to scroll through the
interface withcolour mapping, it might notbe clear to theuserthatthebutton
in the back is connected to the color red if they have not turned the keyfob
aroundyet.Thiscouldbeconfusingandcosttheusertime.
There is no real error prevention included. Once you have chosen for the
unparkingortheunlockingmenu,thereisnowaytogoback.
Thefact that youusecolor mappingcould mean thatitwould taketheusera
couple of tries to get around this concept. Other than that the controls are
clear.
Because the options are limited and the product is heavily constrained, the
efficiency of useis high, which consequently alsomeansthat theflexibility of
theproductisalsoverylimited
The design is minimalistic but not very aesthetic. The sharp edges might
bother theuserifhe/sheis caringthe keyfob inapantspocket. The factthat
thekeyfobstillhasthebasicshapeofanoldfashionedkeyisinteresting.
The keyfob has the size of a smartphone. The user could be annoyed by
anotherdeviceofsuchsizetocarryaroundinhispocket.
Thesystem as it isrightnow doesnotgiveanyfeedbackorrecognitiontothe
useratall.

12

4.Interactionproposal

Thedesignand interaction solution for our keyfob madeusconsideralot ofaspects

andfeatures. Thekeyfobneeds tobeeasytounderstandandtointeractwith.There
are multiple ways to ensure an intuitive interaction with the product. We did not
choose the obvious normal design of a keyfob, instead we thought of the shift of
generationsand howto makeadevicethatcomeswithaneasyinteraction,bybeing
inspired of common game controllers. Since we also have to think of the elderly
audience,wethoughtofacolormappingbetweenthebuttonsontheproductandthe
graphical user interface, that remote controls the car. That makes it easy to
understandforeveryone.
Thekeyfobalso needsto beergonomic and can not becontrolledbytwohands.So
we cameup withasmall round design witha little screen. The roundshapesgivea
pleasantfeelingwhileholdingthedevice.
We also had to think of safety in respect to the design. Therefore we thoughtofa
deadmanswitch onthebackofthekeyfob.Thisdeadmanswitchhastobe pressed
atalltimeswhilethecar ismoving.Assoonastheusersspotsapotentialdanger,all
he has to do is to release that button. The car will then break andcometo a safe
stop.Thisprovidesthemostsecurewayofremotecontrollingacar.

In order to create viable and meaningful interaction with our designated users it is
importantto get thefirstlookoftheproductby creatingclearillustrations,photosand
sketches of the product. While shaping our version of the keyfob we should keep
aspects like designing for pleasure, ambiguity, usecues, constraints and different
interactionstylesinmind.

To give more depth to the prototype we decided to make an interactive prototype

using the program named Axure. This prototype will allowusto domore interactive
tests in later stages ofthe testing.The user can operate thekeyfob, go through the
GUIandsimulateaautomatedparkingprocess.
Aquickwalkthroughvideoisavailablehere:

https://vimeo.com/131758992

Figure9InteractivePrototype

13

Figure10Iterationsketches

14

Based on these sketches wemadeaquick3DmockupinMayatogiveamoreclear

ideaofwhattheendproductwilllookandfeellike.

Figure113DMayamodeliterationprocess

15


5.Interfaceevaluationwithrepresentativesofthe
usergroup

5.1Testsetup

In order to conduct a viableand representable test,thechallenge for uswas toget

as much information and feedback from our test subjects as possible in the short
timespan. For that we needed an optimized and clear test that gets to the core
problemfastly andefficiently. Thequestionwe askedarebasicandclear,wedidnot
wantto distractthe user here from hisorherinitialthoughtprocessbutgetthe most
honest and direct feedback possible. Thats why we avoided questions such as:
what would you change about the product? but rather went for a more direct
approach in our questioning. Other than the questions it was very importantto get
the right test users. The most logical variable here would be age, but sincewe live
onacampusand thereis onlyahandfulof30+peopleherewedecidedtogowitha
more interesting and insightful variable:confidence. We asked the user upfront how
confident he or she felt while driving acarfromascale of 110.Aconfidence level
will give us a clearer insights in trial and error behaviour, operating reliability and
efficiencyofuse.

Thetestsetupwasthefollowing:

Figure12usabilitytestsetup

Thetestpersonwasseatedinfrontofacomputer,onwhichourinteractiveprototype
was set up. The movements of the car weresimply played outby one of us witha
toycaronthedesk.

16

The test person was given different scenarios which they had to play out. We
carefullywatched the participants and timed the process. Afterwards theyhadto fill
outanonlinesurvey.
Foramoredetailedtestplanpleaselookintheappendix.

Before conducting thetestwith representatives ofouruser groupwe had anexpert

review our testsetupandgiveusvaluableadvice.Besidesalotofpositivefeedback,
someofthenegative,tousmoreinteresting,feedbackincludedthefollowing:
Layoutofthedifferentoptionsonthescreenunclear
Notclearenoughfeedback
Foramoredetailspleasecheckthefeedbackformprovidedintheappendix

Based on this, we changed and adjustedourinteractiveprototype and testeditwith

sixrepresentativesofourusergroup.

5.2Usabilitytestresults

All in all, we can say that theconductedusability tests wereasuccess. Allthe test
persons seemed to grasp the concept of our keyfob quickly and had little to no
problemsplaying throughthescenarios.Wedidkeeptheconfidencelevelvariablein
mind. However once we did find people with different confidence levels we soon
noticed that the variable had very little to no effect on the usersbehaviour towards
the keyfob. Thats why we decided to leave that variable out when drawing our
conclusion.
We compared the measured times our test persons needed to complete the
automated parking process to the time people usually take to manually park their
car.Even though wecannotstate thatyousaveasignificantamountoftime,wecan
saythattheautomatedprocessisatleastequallyefficient.
Here are some results from the questionnaire weasked each test personto fill out.

17

Figure13resultsoftheusabilitytestquestionnaire

18

6.Conclusionsandrecommendations

Overallwe are confident toconcludethat our designfor a keyfob wasasuccess.In

the beginning, whendoingresearchonotherstateofthearttechnologieswealready
got a glance of the enormous demand there is for a simple, clever, and helpful
devicethatwouldtakecareoforsupporttheusersneedforParking,safety, control,
enhanced qualityoflife and overall pleasurein useof their car. Early on wefigured
that there were endless functions thatwe could have added, howeverwe weretold
time andtime again,that,sometimes,pilingonfunctionswillonlymakethelifeofthe
user morecomplicated, especiallybecause the keyfobwillbeprovidedbycarrental
services. We needed to create something simple, something that everyone would
understand immediately. Thats why wechose toconstrainourkeyfob, and it payed
off.

Ergonomically we set out to create a product that people could operate intuitively.
Thats why we chose to do the connection between the buttons and the digital
interface withcolour mapping. This allowedusto guide the user throughthe flow of
GUI. In theory however, we found out that putting a color indicated button on the
backof the keyfobwas not ideal.Thepeoplecouldnotonlynotseethecolour,even
if they didtheyhadtoremindthemselvesmultipletimesthatthecolourofthebutton
on the backof the devicewas infact red. Unfortunately this issue had not come up
during our expert review sincetheexpert understood thecolor mappingrightaway.
Thats why the problem came up in the final test which did not allow us to make
iterations. However now that we are wiser, we conclude that we should have not
placed a button on the back but on the side and if we did put itonthebackthere
should have been a clear indication from the start thatthebutton on the back isin
factred.

One of the most important goals we had, was to design a keyfob, that guides the
user through a completelysafe parking process. This pointis mainlycoveredbythe
dead man switch, a switch which when released, immediately triggers a safety
system, which will bring the vehicle to a safe stop. Especially when doing off hand
controls with a vehicle of size it iscritically important thatthe car shuts downwhen
the users loses control or panics. When we would create an actual product, the
deadmans switch would be a top priority. Besides the kill switch the system also
uses a finger scanner which wont allow strangers to operatethekeyfob. The main
user can however, give certain people specific rights, such as only being able to
access the unlock/lock function. This provedeffective inthe past and isdefinitelya
featureinhighdemand.Wecanstatehavingcreatedanoverallsafeproduct.

19

The product should be easy to use. Therefore we came up with an ergonomic

design,so it fits easilyin any hand. It also providesgripso theuserdoesnotdropit
while in use. The color mapping of the product really helps the people understand
how it works, at the very beginning. Therefore the user should be able to use the
keyfobwithoutreadinganyinstructions.

We also wanted to achieve that the user can remote control the carfromtheinside
aswell as from theoutside ofthecaritself.Tomakeourproductcapableofthat,we
gave it multiple remote features such as the function to (un)park, (un)lock, air
conditionandwegaveitalittlescreen.Nowtheusercaneasilybeoutsidethecar.

For anyfutureproduction ofthiskeyfobitissafetostatethatthekeyfobstillneedsa

lotof alterations. Thekeyfobcoulddefinitelybemadesmaller.Rightnowtheamount
of functionality and the size ofourproduct isjust notin balance.Alsothe design of
the product needs work and optimization. We have not yet thought about the
materials we willuse for the productand alsoithas tobemadesurethe product is
wateridiot and fall proof. Furthermore it should be kept in mind that the
competitivenessin the market ofcaroptimizationissignificantandthatthecompany
that were toproducea productlikethisshoulddefinitely seekfor contract withthird
partiesthatarealreadyinthebusinessofdistributioninthisvertical.

20

7.Appendix

7.1References

Figure1:

http://cdn.bmwblog.com/wpcontent/uploads/bmwi8keyfobimages01.jpg
Figure2:
http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article5555158.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/BMW7serie
s.jpg
FIgure3:
http://jimdickins.com/coursework/desi1183webpagedesign/class3xhtmlthestruct
urallayer/carkeyfob/carkeyfob.jpg
Figure4:
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/images/2007/06/05/volvo_s80_pcc.jp
g
Figure5:
http://images.gizmag.com/hero/6605_141206123455.jpg
Figure6:
http://cdn.psfk.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/06/land_rover_remote_control_smartp
hone_5.jpg

7.2Testplan:

FocusPointsand
variablefocuspoints
Themainpointsoffocusareuserfriendliness,efficiencyandUX
1

Theusershouldbeabletointuitivelynavigatethroughthekeyfobsmenu
theiconsandsymbolsshouldbeclearandimmediatelyunderstood
navigatingthroughscreensshouldbefastandefficient

Thekeyfobshouldbeappealingtotheuser
Thebuttonsshouldbewellintegratedandpleasanttopress
The keyfobshouldbebothaestheticallyandphysicallypleasing tothe
user.
Thekeyfobshouldfeelnaturalintheusershands
It should be satisfying enough to the user to operate the carwith the
keyfobinsteadofusingtheregularcontrols.

Theoperationsshouldbesmoothandcannotbelaggyatanytimes.
21

Theparkingfeatureshouldbeveryeasytouseandidiotproof.

Both operating and the actions that come with the operating should have

constraints.
Children cannot use the keyfob and will be filtered out by the finger
scanner that wont allow them to control thecarbut will (iftheparents
approveit)allowthemtoopenthetrunk
the parking feature should have all the constraints that modern cars
already have in their auto and manual parking.
automatic stop,
warnings,automaticadjustmentstothemovement.etc.

Variablesonthefocuspoints

Thetimethattheuserneedstounderstandtheworkingofthekeyfob(knowswhich
buttoncorrespondstowhichfunction)(15).

Thetimeinwhichthecarrespondstothekeyfob(3).

Thetimetheuserneedstooperatethekeyfob(1,3,4).

Thenumberofstepsneededtoexecuteacertainfunction(1,3,4).

Thenumberoferrorsinoperatingthekeyfob(3,4).

Methods

Comparison
Thecomparison that will provideuswiththemostvaluabledataisonewherepeople
with different levels of driving experience will be tested on the way and efficiency
with which theyoperatethe keyfob.Alsoin that way thean insightwillbegainedin
the different age groups and how age might influence theway one operates within
the navigation ofthekeyfob.Weplantomaketwogroups,onewithpeoplethathave
significant driving experienceand one with peoplethatarestillquitenewtodrivinga
car

Independentvariables,thevariablesthatwillvary:
Thelevelofdrivingskills
Theamountofexperience(hoursspentdriving)
Theamountofyearsthatthetestpersonownsalicence
Age
22


Confoundingvariables,variablethatwontvary
Theproduct
Thetimethetestpersonwillhavetooperatethekeyfob
Thesituationpressure(iftherewillbeany)
Thelocationandsetup
Activity,sametaskforeveryone

Thesubjectsetup
The exact same experiment will be conducted foreach participant,allthat will vary
are the participants themselves. The team will not be present in the room, the
participant will have to figure everythingout the first time sinceeach participant will
onlydotheexperimentonce,sonolearningcurve.

1. ScenarioTestedFocusPoints

The user should be able to intuitively navigate the car, since it ispossiblehedoesnothave
much experience with cars. That means,theparkingfeatureshouldbeveryeasytouseand
idiotproof. The operations should be smooth and cannot be laggyat anytimes,otherwiseit
couldbedangerousforthechild.

1. ScenarioTestedFocusPoints

Theusershouldbeabletointuitivelynavigatethroughthekeyfobsmenu.

1. ScenarioTestedFocusPoints

Both operating and the actions that come with the operating should have constraints. So
childrencanonlyusethewhattheirparentsallowthemto.

Participants

We conduct the test with 6 people, which all have a different amount of driving experience.
Togetanideaaboutit,weaskthemtoratetheirdrivingskillsonascalefrom1to10.

Theproductprototyperemainsthesameforeverysingletest.

23


Figure11Testsituation

Script

This script functions as a recipe for the test. Use it for every test subject. The test subjects
havetobecarefullyselected,inordertohavetherightrepresentatives.

1. Each participant gets a hard copy of the three scenarios. He sits in front of a
computer with the screen visible for him and the testers. On the computer is the
interactiveprototypeoftheproduct.
2. Each scenario needs to be completely processed by the participant. The testers
gonna give a starting sign and the participants have to indicate when they are done
with the actual scenario. Meanwhile the testers stop the time on every time the
participantachievessomething.
3. Afterthetestsituation,therewillbealittlequestionnaireaboutthetest.

NeededMaterial

Fourtimes:Allthreescenariosandthequestionnaire.

Thesketchofthetestsetup.
24

Atabletofillinthetestingtimes.(Tobefilledinbytheobservers).

Detailedlistofparticipants.

Camera

TheQuestionnaire

1.Howconfidentareyouwithdriving.(0=Notatall10Veryconfident).
2.Doyouthinkthekeyfobisappealingtotheuser?(0=Notatall10Veryappealing).
3.Istheproducteasytouse?(0=Notusable10Veryeasy)
5. What would you pay additionally per day for a rental car to get this keyfob and its
functionalityinsteadofanormalone?
6.Doyouthinkthekeyfobhastherightsize?
7.Doesthecolormappinghelptheusertointeractmoreintuitive?
8. How much time to spend is okay for you in order to understand how this new system
works?

Filledinquestionnaire:

25

26

7.2ExpertReviewForm

27


28