Research

The Method

Survey: We administered an online survey with multiple choice and free response questions to gauge the existing social scene surrounding the space we intend to work in. Questions included:
• How often do you use elevators?
• When you arrive at the elevator, what is the first thing you typically do?
• What emotions do you usually feel when waiting for the elevator?

Respondents on this survey were recruited through social networks (posting on social media etc.). All of our participants are college students at UCSD because the scope of our project is specific to public waiting spaces at UCSD. In total, we had 35 respondents between the ages of 19 and 22.

Key Findings

Competitive Analysis: With our project being inspired by existing collaborative games such as crosswords and Wordle, we analyzed three competing products employing aspects of our prospective product.

Existing Literature: Through looking at the academic research surrounding social computing in environments similar to StandBy, the key takeaways we found were:
‍
From "The waiting room as a relational space: young patients and their families’ experience in a day hospital" (Corsano et al, 2015)
• Both adults and kids experience boredom in waiting rooms
• Certain visual stimuli can increase the pleasantness of waiting for oncology patients
→ a kiosk with interactive visual stimuli may increase pleasantness while waiting for college students
‍
From "Perceptions of Psychotherapy Waiting Rooms: Design Recommendations" (Noble and Devlin, 2021)
• Colorful environments with natural sounds reduce the stress experienced in waiting spaces
→ a more natural UI with more color and some background sounds could create a welcoming environment that encourages kiosk use

Prototyping

Session 1: We conducted our first prototyping session as follows:
• Participants are split into groups of 4
• One participant calls the elevator
• Participants can explore the iPad on display and play a crossword together
• Participants play their chosen game on the kiosk screen
• The elevator arrives and a new group of ~3-4 participants enter the lobby
‍
Iterations and session 2: After our initial prototyping session, we modified our prototype experience to include:
• Groups with participants who do not know each other to simulate a more realistic waiting experience
• More types of games offered for different levels of participation between group members, including an asynchronous option
• Multiple kiosks set up to make product scalable for groups of different sizes

“ I like the collaboration between groups, and the option to do something fun and creative during a moment of downtime! ”
— Session 1 & 2 Participant

Final Iteration

Final Iteration

We got to our final design by iterating on our initial idea taking into account concept feedback from Professor Dow & TAs from classwork and two sets of feedback from classmates & IAs who participated in both our prototype sessions (Week 8 & 10).
‍
Offering a wide variety of games of different types that can be played synchronously at the kiosk.
‍
• The range of game offerings accounts for different preferences, group sizes, accessibility restraints (Worldle vs. Heardle), continuity lengths (the big Crossword for players who want to collaboratively add to the progress of previous users through the day, the Mini-Crossword for players who want immediate complete feedback on their own performance), and time frame  (the Play Anywhere section is for those who want to continue participating asynchronously even if they aren't waiting long).
‍
Offering a team leaderboard to appeal to players' competitive nature. This encourages collaboration, camaraderie, and social bonding with the strangers who users encounter in the elevator lobby — they have a shared goal!
‍
• A team is a groups of people who play together at the kiosk. When a team tries a game together, the kiosk auto-assigns them a team number and logs their score onto a leaderboard. Points that lead to a  score/ranking would correspond to any of these, depending on the game type:
• Time to complete puzzle (with lower = more points)
• Clues unlocked (e.g. words found in a big collaborative Crossword per minute for fairness, as waiting times will vary)
• Accuracy (e.g. number of guesses to reach correct Worldle)

See our video below!

Next Steps

1. User-Testing in a Real-World Context
Our current prototypes were only tested in discussion sections where participants already knew each other and were familiar with the project. This limited our ability to see how strangers, unaware of being observed, would respond—especially due to the Hawthorne effect.
‍
To address this, we plan to test the prototype in a busy elevator lobby on campus. This will allow us to observe whether users interact with the kiosk and how they engage with it throughout the day. Testing in a real-world setting will provide more accurate insights and help us refine the design before implementing it further.
‍
2. Refine Game Offerings
During prototyping, we primarily featured New York Times Mini-Games in our interface. Users responded positively, but one person noted that these games are widely accessible on personal devices. This raises an important question: Why would users engage with the kiosk instead of simply playing on their phones?

To address this, we integrated additional games like the NYT big crossword and the Play Anywhere option. Moving forward, we aim to:
• Develop games unique to the kiosk—similar to Google’s well-known “No Internet Dino Game.”
• Research and identify games that specifically encourage collaboration and social interaction.

Feasibility

We believe the kiosk would be both feasible and impactful in real-world contexts. Kiosks are familiar technology, increasingly used in public spaces like cafes and restaurants. Other engagement tools—such as banners, speakers, or digital displays—have already proven effective at capturing user attention in similar environments.

A related study by Zambetta et al. on AR games at theme parks found that players perceived queue wait times to be five times shorter compared to non-players. This supports the principle we tested: an unoccupied mind focuses intensely on time, whereas a mentally engaged user experiences less discomfort during idle moments. Our kiosk would provide that mental engagement, reducing perceived wait times and fostering a more enjoyable experience.

Reflection

Mix and Match:
In our first user-testing session, participants interacted primarily within their familiar small groups, limiting “stranger-to-stranger” engagement. To fix this, we mixed participants who didn’t know each other in the second session. The result? Individuals who began alone eagerly joined groups, even with unfamiliar faces. This confirmed our hypothesis: quick, collaborative games help strangers connect.

Quick Games:
We expanded the variety of games in our second session to ensure there was something for everyone. Users became so engaged that we had to repeatedly remind them their “elevator” had arrived! Even after the session ended, some users continued playing the games on their personal devices, discussing them with others.

Through this process, we learned how small design tweaks—like variety and collaboration-focused games—can significantly enhance engagement and connection.