back

Designing a non-visual experience

Product

Mobile application for runners with a non-visual experience. Student project and competition winner, exhibited at Games for Health Europe 2017.

Scope of responsibilities

Product Ideation, Media Production, UX Design, User Testing, Feedback & Iteration

What is an old student project doing here?

This project got me into product design

It is very dear to my heart, and I believe it is an amazing example of how a team of random, diverse, passionate individuals can combine their knowledge and experience to create a product that is highly recognized not only by regular users but also by experts in the healthcare industry.

The Event
Teachers from several programs at Fontys University of Applied Sciences collaborated to create a challenge for students. More than 100 students, organised into 20 teams, competed for the opportunity to present their work at Games for Health Europe, with three teams selected as winners. Each group was assigned a challenge by their teachers. The event took place at Eindhoven's largest concert hall, Effenaar, and featured user testing and primary presentations at the first event, and a final presentation with jury ratings and the announcement of the winners at the second event.
The Challenge
The challenge was to create an app for runners that provided a non-visual experience. At that time, most apps offered only a visual experience for tracking pace and other metrics, which could later be viewed as analytics. Since it's not easy to use a phone while running, the goal was to enhance the running experience by making the app non-visual, thus preventing any inconvenience during the run.
The Team
My program was a minor offered by the university to both local and exchange students, bringing together a diverse group from various programs and backgrounds within the IT sector. I worked in a team of five: two software engineers, two media and design students, and myself—a student of applied informatics with experience in video filming & editing, and design.
brainstorming ideas

Ideation

Initially, each team member took time individually to come up with ideas and deepen their understanding of the subject. We then created a mind map and had a brainstorming session, categorising all ideas into groups to discuss possible solutions.
Since the solution needed to be non-visual, we focused on sensory alternatives. Music became our main focus, as many runners already listen to music while running, providing a ready-made target audience.
Our goal was to enhance the running experience by adding an extra dimension to it. We all liked the idea of exploring new places, as it offers a fresh experience for frequent runners and added experience for those getting into running for fitness. We combined the concepts of music and exploration by providing an experience of exploring new places with musical guidance.
‍
Concept: Exploring new places being guided by music.

Testing solutions

Although the idea of panning the sound was the favourite from the start, our supervisor encouraged us to think of other ways of enabling our idea of non-visual guidance. After a short brainstorm we settled to test out 3 methods: panning, wearables (vibration) and verbal navigation.
Sound panning
We tested it by using headphones and panning feature on iPhone walking around the university and panning the music to the left or right ear when we wanted the test person to turn.

Pros:

Very efficient, short response time, feels natural, fun

Cons:

This might be an issue for individuals with hearing impairments in one ear

Wearables (Vibration)
The other teams attempted to incorporate wearables as part of their solution, so we decided to explore whether our idea could benefit from them as well. Since we didn’t have access to actual wearables, we improvised by using two phones in vibration mode. To simulate the functionality, we called one phone to indicate a left turn and the other for a right turn.

Pros:

Interesting experience

Cons:

Long response times, delays in recognising which arm is sending the signal, the need to purchase additional equipment

Verbal navigation
To make the route random, we decided to test it by providing directions manually. One teammate organised a testing session with his friend, who was a runner. During the test, the teammate followed on a bike and shouted directions to the runner

Pros:

Very efficient, short response time (although some individuals may struggle with distinguishing left from right)

Cons:

Element of fun is missing

App Design

For the first user test, we created a quick prototype of the visual elements of our concept, focusing on the pre- and post-run experience. I was responsible for designing the user flow, and my colleague and I collaborated on the visuals, with him teaching me how to use my first prototyping tool.
The flow was structured around two primary questions: distance or time, and preference for nature or urban environments. Based on the user’s choices, the app would suggest a "blind" route for running. For those selecting a time-based run, the route could be adjusted dynamically based on the runner's pace. Our initial idea was to keep the route hidden, offering only a "return home" button, but we modified it to showing the outline of the route after the first user test. We also decided to incorporate run statistics and a social feature, allowing users to share their routes with friends.

User Testing vol.1

First large user test was done in the concert hall Effenaar in Eidhoven. All teams had a space for showcasing their product and perform user tests. For the user testing we prepared 3 stations.
App Station
At the app station, we introduced our concept and tested the first app prototype. We discussed participants' initial impressions and their interest in the idea.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• Many users, particularly those training for a marathon at that time, felt the solution would enhance their running routine.
•  Some users expressed concerns about not knowing the route beforehand. However, when asked if a basic outline of the journey would eliminate their concern, the majority confirmed that it would
Concept Station
For concept testing, we set up a small labyrinth. Without explaining the participants that we were going to use sound panning, we gave them headphones and instructed them to respond naturally and walk the labyrinth however they feel like.

Key Takeaways:
• Nearly all participants intuitively understood the task, with only one or two experiencing difficulties.
• Navigating the labyrinth was challenging for people with hearing difficulties.
Feedback Station
To gather feedback, we created a brief questionnaire to capture key insights on both the app’s usability and the non-visual experience.
‍
Key Takeaways:
‍• Many participants were pleasantly surprised by how much they enjoyed the experience, describing it as very fun.
• Participants appreciated the concept of exploring new areas, as they often feel bored with their usual routes, and they liked the option to choose between time- and distance-based routes.
• Overall, the feedback was very positive.

Surveys, User & Expert interviews

Between the first and second events at Effenaar, we had a few weeks to refine our idea, prepare for the final presentation, and conduct user research
Surveys
As a first step we prepared a questionnaire that we spread though running groups and pages on social media. We managed to get 100 responses. The questionnaire included questions about their running habits and preferences, usage of runnings apps and what motivates them to go for a run.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• On average, respondents run 18 times per month, indicating that many run almost every day.
• 50% of respondents listen to music every time they run, while 32% do so occasionally.
• For 71% of respondents, running is both a sport and a source of joy, while 13% view it purely as a source of joy.
• 86% of respondents use running apps.
• 31% said they prefer running random routes or exploring new ones.
• 53% prefer to run alone, while 30% like to alternate between running alone and with others.
• Most respondents prefer to share their results only within the app or keep them private.
• When asked about motivation, the most common responses were "feeling better afterward" and "community and family." Other notable mentions included body image, getting ready, challenging themselves, and maintaining a routine.

The survey highlighted a clear target audience for our product: runners who prefer running alone, listening to music, and exploring new routes—preferences that align with the majority of respondents. While the survey offered valuable insights for enhancing the app and increasing its motivational aspects, these features were outside the scope of our MVP goals for the project.
User Interviews
For the user interviews, we reached out to individuals from the physical education faculty who run both professionally and as a hobby. We conducted one-on-one interviews with 10 participants.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• Many runners are interested in exploring new types of running routines.
• Our app appears to be a great solution for adding variety to their routines.
• Music enhances the running experience and can be deliberately used to influence pace and performance.
• Tracking statistics and progress is important for runners.
• The running community is active, making it a good idea to incorporate a social element into the app.
Expert Interview
For our expert interview, we selected Andy Statham, the co-founder and CEO of Arion, based in Eindhoven. Arion specialises in producing smart insoles that deliver real-time audio and visual feedback via a smartphone to create a wearable coaching experience, allowing runners to make real-time adjustments. The company's target audience includes professional runners, researchers, and physiotherapists.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• While the concepts of a non-visual experience are similar, the products target very different audiences.
• Andy provided valuable technical and scientific insights, which were helpful for gaining a deeper understanding of the subject but were mostly irrelevant to our focus on creating a fun experience.
• Wearables are expensive and currently not accessible to a broad audience.
• Andy appreciated our idea, describing it as a great option for casual runners.
• Our app could be enhanced by offering real-time feedback based on basic data, such as speed, time, and distance.

Video filming

For our final presentation, we decided to create a short promo video to better represent the product. In the video, we demonstrated the use of sound panning to indicate turns. We also developed the slogan "Break the Routine'" to emphasise the fun and new experiences our app offers. The video showcased a contrast between the monotony of running the same route repeatedly and the excitement of using our app to explore new and engaging places by running a random route.

User Testing vol.2

The second user test and final presentation were also held at the Effenaar concert hall, where we set up three stations
App & Feedback Station
This time, we combined the app and feedback stations. My colleague presented the product and conducted an A/B user test, comparing a 'blind' route with an outlined route. Feedback was collected through a chat and by having participants fill out a questionnaire.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• People still found our product interesting
• We got similar feedback to the fist user test: people liked the idea and enjoyed the experience
• Most people liked the option of the app with the outline of the route

• People still found our product interesting.
• Most people preferred the app option with an outlined route.
• We received similar feedback to the first user test: participants liked the idea and enjoyed the experience.
Video Station
We set up two screens with headphones to present our promo video to the public. To attract more people and gather more feedback, we also prepared small cups of popcorn.
‍
Key Takeaways:
• We received many compliments on the video we filmed; it was an excellent way to illustrate our concept.
• Many people became interested in trying the concept after watching the video.
• The video served as a great conversation starter. It encouraged people to share their own experiences, ask more questions about the product, and offer ideas and feedback.
Concept Station
For the second user test, we aimed to test the panning feature during actual running. We invited people to the bike parking area, the closest accessible space, to try out the product. For those who hadn’t seen the video, we didn’t explain the panning element in advance and simply asked them to do what felt natural.

Key Takeaways:
• The concept is naturally understandable and enjoyable.
• There is an issue with navigation when the speed is high and turns are close together.
• The panning should start earlier when the speed is high.
• When the speed is slow or regular, there were no issues with understanding which route to take.
Competition Results
Seven judges rated our project in four categories: Functional (useful), Usable, Pleasurable, and Meaningful, with a maximum of 5 points in each. Our highest-rated categories were "Pleasurable" and "Meaningful." Judges noted that the concept was smart with potential for further upgrade. The main critique was that the solution was too simple, and might have potential challenges in technical implementation.

We received an average score of 4 points and secured second place.

Games for Health Europe 2017

As second-place winners, we were invited to present our project at the Games for Health Europe conference. We set up two screens with headphones to showcase our promo video, in line with exhibition restrictions. Although many companies at the conference displayed products developed over years, we were pleasantly surprised by the interest in our month-long student project. Engaging with professionals from the healthcare field was very insightful, giving us valuable feedback on potential challenges and great networking opportunities.

The end of the project

After a highly productive first month, we were left with just a few tasks to complete: polishing the designs, developing the prototype to demonstrate its feasibility (my teammates successfully implemented a basic random route generation), and preparing management tasks such as the Lean Canvas and Value Proposition.We later conducted user testing with the final prototype, performed heuristic testing with experts, and prepared a comprehensive presentation to showcase all the work we had accomplished.

Unfortunately, the only material I could find from all the work we did were photos of the heuristic evaluation.
‍

Our project was selected as the best in the class, and the entire team received high scores for the minor. Many people encouraged us to continue developing the project, with some even offering assistance in securing investments. However, at the time, my teammates and I were more focused on our studies and personal development, so we decided not to pursue further development.

Why was the project successful?

The Team

Our team was exceptionally well-balanced, despite being randomly assigned by the teacher before the semester started. We had a good mix of product and tech skills, and everyone was super engaged and enthusiastic, splitting tasks were never a problem. Often, we did tasks together or in small groups, even when one person could have managed alone. Everyone was open, collaborative, and contributed creatively to the project, offering ideas and help. We also learned from one another and shared our knowledge. Tasks were assigned based on individual strengths, and we did work rotation when someone felt exhausted. It was a fun, professional, and respectful environment—one of the best team experiences I've had.

The Idea

Our idea’s strength lays in its simplicity. While our classmates developed complex concepts that presented unexpected challenges in testing and production, we focused on creating a straightforward, efficient solution. This approach kept us from facing major issues and ensured that our product remained highly accessible. Users could understand and use it immediately, requiring only headphones and a quick setup by answering two questions. We aimed to create a solid foundation that could be evolved, and despite its simplicity, the product delivers a fun and enjoyable experience.

The Supervision

Studying in the Netherlands gave me a whole new perspective on how the learning process can be structured. In the Czech Republic, education tends to be more directive, where students are shown a way how a task should be done and they should copy it, often with little room for experimentation. In contrast, my experience in the Netherlands introduced me to a more open, supportive approach: teachers act as advisors, creating an environment for students to explore, practice, and develop skills independently.
When I first arrived, I was surprised by how skilled and tech-savvy Dutch students were. I initially thought they were taught these skills at university, but soon realised they were encouraged to explore and learn on their own, with guidance rather than strict instruction. Professors provided valuable advice on software, organized events, and connected us with knowledgeable individuals, supporting our growth. The independent learning became far more valuable for me than simply being told how to complete a task. Our professors provided us with encouragement, feedback, and support whenever we needed it, creating a highly motivating environment.

Check out a major concept redesign that increased productivity by 40%

Concept redesign: Simplifying data collection

@2025 Victoria Uelskaya

LinkedInCVvictoria.uelskaya@gmail.com