Not Another Social Media App:
Design to Assist Community Interaction in the Digital Age
By
Amy Minh Trang Nguyen
BFA in Graphic Design, California College of The Arts, 2019

A CRITICAL AND PROCESS DOCUMENTATION THESIS PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF DESIGN

MASTER OF DESIGN

EMILY CARR UNIVERSITY OF ART + DESIGN
2023

© Amy Nguyen, 2023

Acknowledgment
A special thanks to my supervisor, Christopher Hethrington, for your support, inspira on, and
thorough reviews during this en re journey.
Thank you to my reviewer Haig Armen, for your though ul feedback and recommenda ons.
Thank you to my fellow designers, Haoqian Liu, Sohee Park and Gavin Liang for your
contribu on to the research process and insigh ul comments.
Thank you to my MDes 2022 cohort; I learned so much from all of you.

Abstract
This Master of Design Research project explores the ques on “how can design assist
community interac on in the digital age?” by examining community dynamics in the era of social
media and understanding the role of design in this space. The study iden fies the widening gap
between virtual and physical communi es, which leads to the design explora on for an
appropriate solu on. The design outcome offers a hybrid social experience that leverages digital
technology to support and enhance community interac on.
Humans are social beings. We live with families, we work in teams, and we bond over shared
beliefs. The human brain is hard-wired to connect; it’s an important part of our adap ve skills
(Lieberman, 2013). When coming together, we form communi es for support and
companionship. As the internet becomes an integral part of daily life, face-to-face
communica on is no longer the only way to build connec ons. In the online space, human
interac on can be designed and mediated through digital means. There are currently numerous
community pla orms to help fulfill the human need to connect. However, when interviewed
many young adults said they feel disconnected from the people around them, despite being
socially ac ve online.
A compara ve analysis of three community pla orms– Facebook Groups, Meetup and Mighty
Networks – pinpoints the gap between product direc ons and user needs. Moreover, the study
shows a lack of emphasis on building local communi es. As a result, it reveals opportuni es for
a new design interven on.
The research is conducted through par cipatory methods, such as in-depth interviews and
focus group ac vi es, to study how young adults interact with community in the digital age.
The par cipants are carefully recruited to fit the research focus and ensure effec ve
collabora on. As they share valuable insights and inspire the solu on, they become an
important part of the project. The collected qualita ve data help build a user mental model and
direct the design explora on.
The synthesis of primary and secondary research results in the design of a hyperlocal
community pla orm that allows users to interact with the communi es around them. This
mobile-na ve experience blends virtual interac ons into the physical world which gives young
adults an easy way to build new rela onships. The design solu on aims to narrow the gap
between online and in-person connec ons by introducing a new but familiar way of interac ng.
This in turn will reinvigorate digital na ves’ social lives.

Key Terms
Face-to-face Interac on
Face-to-face interac on is social communica on carried out without any media ng technology.
It involves more than one individual interac ng, in the same physical space, using verbal and
non-verbal cues. (Baym, 2015)

Mediated Interac on
Mediated interac on is the interac on between people enabled by communica on
technologies. For example, phone calls, text messaging, emails, instant messaging, social
networks and more. (Baym, 2015)

Online Community
Online Community is a group of people with shared interests or purposes who use the internet
to interact. One online pla orm can be considered a community but also can host many
different groups. Most online communi es are not ed to geographical space. (Baym, 2015)

Local Community
A local Community is a group of people that is organized around common values within a shared
geographical loca on. (Baym, 2015)

Digital Na ve
The genera on of people who grew up in the era of ubiquitous technology, including computers
and the internet. They are comfortable with technology and computers from an early age and
consider technology to be an integral and necessary part of their lives. (Prensky, 2001)

Table of Content
Acknowledgment
Abstract
Key Terms

1. Context & Framing

3

2. Secondary Research

5

2.1. Social Interac on in The Digital Age

5

2.2. Modes of Social Interac on

6

2.3. Opportunity for Interven on: Compe

3. Primary Research

ve Analysis

8
15

3.1. Research Methods

15

3.2. Ethical Considera on

15

3.3. Analysis & Findings

16

3.3.1. Semi-structured Interview

16

3.3.2. Focus Group Ac vity

17

3.4. Design Direc on

19

3.4.1. User Mental Model

19

3.4.2. User Persona

21

4. Design Outcome

23

4.1. Scope & Define Project

23

4.2. Design Concept

24

4.3. Design Prototype

30

1

5. Reflec on & Future Direc on

35

5.1. Insights & Learning

35

5.2. Barriers & Limita ons

36

5.3. Future Direc ons

36

6. Works Cited

38

7. Appendix

40

7.1. List of Figures

40

7.2. App Screens

41

2

1. Context & Framing
Over the past two decades, the internet has worked its way into people’s lives and become a
necessity of the modern world. We spend more and more me online, as digital technology is
embedded into numerous daily ac vi es. The internet has completely transformed not only
how we func on but also how we connect and build rela onships with others (Atwood, 2011).
As it eliminated many constraints of the physical world, the internet allowed us to expand our
social network across the globe. Naturally, new connec ons and communi es started to form
online. In this virtual space, human interac ons can be directed through digital means
(Friedman, 2017). Mediated online interac ons (Thompson, 2020) are facilitated through digital
interfaces, carefully cra ed by design professionals. This study explores the ques on:

“How can design assist community interac on in the digital age?”
In recent years, while online communi es and social media are thriving, physical communi es
appear to be “less a rac ve”, especially among the digital genera ons who embrace and rely
heavily on technology. According to DataReportal’s July 2022 global overview (Kemp, 2022),
more than half of the world uses social media (59%). Facebook, the largest social pla orm,
publishes an analy c report on user demographics, which shows the largest group of users is
25-34 years old (31.2%), and close behind is 18-24 years old (31%) (Barnhart, 2022). Based on
these sta s cs, teenagers and young adults are leading the adop on of social media into daily
life.

45% of U.S. teens say they are “almost constantly” online (Anderson & Jiang, 2018)
85% of all millennials use social media (Vogels, 2019)

A study, conducted by the Pew Research Center on American teenagers and social media
(Lenhart, 2015), pointed out that 54% of those surveyed said they text their friends at least
once a day. In comparison, only 33% said they talk face-to-face with their friends consistently.
This behaviour is known as “an -social networking” (Stout, 2010), a term which refers to an
unwillingness or inability to interact with others in-person due to preoccupa on with digital
media. It’s not difficult to spot “an -social networking” among the youth nowadays. How many
mes have you walked into a restaurant or a bar and seen people looking down at their phones,
scrolling on social media, despite being surrounded by others?
3

Since digital na ves are much more comfortable communica ng through mediated interac on,
face-to-face interac on becomes less favourable. Gary Small, a neuroscien st and the author of
“iBrain: Surviving the Technological Altera on of the Modern Mind,” believes that digital na ves
have a more challenging me reading social cues (Asghar, 2013). “Even though young digital
na ves are very good with tech skills, they are weak with face-to-face human contact skills,” he
said. Other studies argue that technology is bringing young people closer than ever – many
teens said social media be er connects them to others’ feelings and lives (Lenhart, 2015). This
study doesn’t intend to join the debate of whether technology is saving us or ruining us. It looks
at how digital media can be shaped to support a balanced social life for the digital genera ons.
Mediated communica on (Baym, 2015) is the new social language for digital na ves. Tex ng,
pos ng, commen ng and so on is how they self-express, communicate and build connec ons
socially. Like all languages, this new language was created by humans. People access the digital
world through interfaces, which are carefully cra ed to create experiences. The experience on
social pla orms, in par cular, is designed to connect people online. For example, “Story” is a
feature on Instagram that allows users to share a snapshot, in real- me, with their community
and receive “reac ons”, in the form of text messages or icons. This interac on can only exist via
technology. Similarly, other virtual interac ons are tailored exclusively to support users in the
online space.
This is the social language that young people are more familiar and comfortable with, which
explains why they struggle to communicate interpersonally. The study takes a closer look at the
current online social landscape and examines how social interac on is facilitated, in this space,
to find opportuni es for design interven on.

4

2. Secondary Research
2.1. Social Interaction in The Digital Age
In a survey, conducted by Nancy Baym in 2002, many par cipants expressed that they prefer
face-to-face conversa ons over telecommunica on or online communica on (Baym, 2015).
Most of the par cipants ranked face-to-face as the most personal way of communica ng. They
thought talking over the phone is personal as well but not as in mate and the internet was the
least personal. Phrases such as “hear their voices”, and “see their reac ons” appeared several
mes throughout the par cipants’ responses. Baym referred to them as non-verbal social cues,
which are o en absent in meditated human interac ons. The survey pointed out the tendency
to rank media based on the range of verbal and non-verbal social cues they provide. Because
face-to-face interac on is considered the norm, other kinds of communica on were compared
to it. Thus, the internet was seen as “a lesser version of the real thing” (Baym, 2015).
In person-to-person interac on, non-verbal cues are important because of their ability to
convey emo on. For example, smiling at someone, nodding, and using hand gestures are ways
to express reac ons and emo ons which are difficult to be transmi ed through media. As
discussed in sec on 1, digital na ves rely heavily on mediated communica on and virtual
interac on. They are more comfortable interac ng with limited cues, which requires less effort
in transferring and processing informa on. In me, they lose interest in face-to-face interac on
and spend less me with the real people around them.
Baym, in her book “Personal Connec ons in The Digital Age”, stated that viewing mediated
communica on as a diminished form of face-to-face communica on is “…selling people short,
failing to recognize the extent to which we are driven to maximize our communica on
sa sfac on and interac on.” (Baym, 2015, pg.63). Moreover, this “communica on impera ve”
(Walther, 1994) mo vates people to be crea ve and work around the barriers of online
mediated communica on. This study pushes the constraint of mediated human interac on
through research and design explora ons to find a solu on that can help digital na ves achieve
more of a balance between digital and physical social interac on.
One might argue that we don’t need to add one more digital solu on on top of the countless
exis ng social applica ons out there. Businesses and organiza ons have been con nually
u lizing the internet and technologies to foster meaningful personal connec ons, which is why
Facebook, Instagram and other forms of mediated interac ons con nue to grow. A study on the
impact of communica on media on human connec on revealed that in the digital age, most
5

rela onships are “media mul plexity”, meaning they are conducted on more than one media
(Haythornthwaite, 2005). Moreover, stronger rela onships use more media which indicates that
in this context, more is more. The design solu on, that stems from this study, focuses on
crea ng a new channel for digital na ves to interact with their communi es, not only online but
also in person.

2.2. Modes of Social Interaction
In the digital age, human interac ons exist in various forms through media, and when people
can choose between different media, the media become significant (Baym, 2015), represen ng
the message and the rela onship between users. Moreover, each medium has its purpose. For
example, email is o en chosen for formal communica on between individuals in professional
rela onships while tex ng is more common for casual rela onships.
John B. Thompson (2020), a Bri sh sociologist, dis nguished four basic types of interac ons,
including face-to-face interac on, mediated interac on, mediated quasi-interac on
and mediated online interac on. He developed a way of thinking about media through
a sociological lens.

1. Face-to-face interac on: It takes place in the context of co-presence and evolves
mul ple non-verbal and verbal cues. It’s dialogical, which means it involves a two-way
flow of informa on.
2. Mediated interac on: It allows interac on to stretch across space and me. It has a
narrow range of non-verbal or symbolic cues and is also dialogical. Some examples of
mediated interac on are telephone conversa ons and emails.
3. Mediated quasi-interac on: Similar to mediated interac on, it stretches across space
and me and involves a certain narrowing of symbolic cues. It’s monological in
character, which means the flow of communica on is one-way, oriented toward the
recipients. For example, TV, radio and newspapers.
4. Mediated online interac on: Similarly to the other types of mediated interac ons, it
involves the stretching of me and space and the narrowing of symbolic cues. But it’s
different in two key aspects; it’s dialogical and oriented toward mul ple other people –
many-to-many. For example, social media pla orms.

6

Mediated quasi-interac on is out of the scope of this research because it’s monological. Thus,
it’s not discussed any further in this paper.

Fig1. Four types of interac on. (Thompson, 2020)

In dis nguishing the different types of interac on, Thompson (2020) emphasizes that
technologies evolve constantly and blur the lines between modes of interac on. The purpose of
this study is to encourage in-person interac on among digital na ves without dismissing the
value of mediated interac on. Thus, the appropriate medium to achieve this goal is one with the
characteris cs of both face-to-face interac on and mediated interac on. Through this medium,
design can create a woven path between different modes of interac on that helps users move
toward a more balanced social life.

2.3. Opportunity for Intervention: Competitive Analysis
To put the proposed solu on into perspec ve, a compe

ve analysis was ini ated to

understand the exis ng solu ons and iden fy poten al areas for improvement. There are
countless social media pla orms currently available but for this study, the analysis focused
exclusively on social pla orms that support community interac on. It looks at three dis nc ve
pla orms, Facebook Groups, Mighty Networks and Meetup, to ensure objec vity and diversity
as they offer different sets of interac ons and target different groups of audiences. In selec ng
these par cular candidates, the study takes a step back from the current scope to have a more
holis c view of the online social landscape.

7

1. Facebook Groups:

1.8 billion users
Tens of millions of groups
It’s a built-in community-focused module on the Facebook app. Facebook Groups is where
exis ng Facebook users can create and join communi es based on shared interests. All
communi es are hosted and centralized within the app.
2. Mighty Networks:

Over 10,000 customers
It’s a community-building service that provides users with the tool to create and customize
their communi es. Each community built with Mighty Network is unique and independent.
Members can only join via invita ons to specific communi es.
3. Meetup:

28 million members
Over 260,000 meetup groups
It’s a community pla orm for hos ng in-person and virtual ac vi es and events. Community
members come together by a ending group gatherings.

When comparing the pla orms side-by-side, it becomes apparent that they share a similar
structure that can be broken down into components. The study analyzed each component by
tes ng user flows, func onali es and interac ons. There are five components under each
pla orm – including the main feed, the community search and recommenda on flow, the
request and join a community flow, and the community page (member view and admin view).

Fig 2. Five main components of community pla orms

8

To start the analysis, the components were laid out ver cally, following the unique user flow of
each pla orm. While Facebook Groups and Meetups share the same flow because they host all
communi es under one central pla orm, Mighty Networks has a different approach. Each
community under Mighty Networks has its own page, with a unique URL, therefore only
community members who have access to the URL can request to join.
In other words, Mighty Networks is a network of independent communi es which are available
exclusively to invited members, while Facebook Groups and Meetups are public hubs of
communi es, where anyone can join and create communi es.

Fig 3. Compe

ve research test flow

9

A user account was created for each pla orm to test the product’s end-to-end. By thoroughly
analyzing the features under each component, the research unpacked how each pla orm
facilitates community interac ons through design. A er the test flows were completed, the
informa on was synthesized into notes for comparison.

Fig 4. Compe

ve analysis

By comparing how the three pla orms fulfill user needs differently, the research iden fied
poten al areas for designer interven on.

10

Feature Gap
While searching beyond these three precedents for other exis ng community pla orms, the
study recognized two types of solu ons; one focuses on online mediated interac on and the
other focuses on face-to-face interac on. Facebook Groups, Mighty Networks vs Meetup
comparison is the representa on of the current market trends that capitalize on the different
targeted groups of audiences. Even though all three pla orms accommodate both online and inperson interac ons, they have different focuses.
The different priori es reflect how the product features are designed. Facebook Groups and
Mighty Networks provide many features that support and promote online community
interac ons, such as hos ng mul ple community group chats, live-streaming events, crea ng
audio channels and more. Meanwhile, the features that support face-to-face interac on are
o en minimal and hidden under layers of informa on.

Fig 5. Face-to-face interac on and Online mediated Interac on comparison

On the other hand, Meetup focuses heavily on features that support organizing and hos ng inperson events, such as event loca on map view, events calendar view, and purchase or sign-up
for RSVP (event ckets). The online interac on between community members, however, is
limited to only comments and group chats.

11

Fig 6. Face-to-face interac on and Online mediated Interac on comparison

Through comparison analysis, the study iden fied a feature gap between pla orms that focus
on online-mediated interac on and ones that focus on face-to-face interac on. Thus, there is
an opportunity for a solu on that incorporates a more balanced interac on of both.

12

Local Community and Face-to-Face Interaction Support are Overlooked
The study pointed out that there aren’t many features that highlight local communi es on
Facebook Groups and Mighty Networks. In contrast to the automated and “shiny” features that
help users build a global network, those for building local communi es require more manual
work. For example, to associate a community with a loca on, users need to manually search and
link a loca on or include the loca on as part of the community’s name.

Fig 7. Local communi es search func ons analysis

Unlike Facebook Groups and Mighty Networks, Meetup highlights hos ng in-person events and
building local communi es, yet the features they deliver are merely func onal – with simple
filters and a standard map view. Even though the interface is easy to navigate, the interac on is
dull and una rac ve, especially for digital na ves, who enjoy robust experiences.

13

Fig 8. Local communi es search func ons analysis

All three pla orms offer many great features that help build community, providing users with
the tools to communicate and plan for mee ngs or events. However, once the planning
concludes, there isn’t any further support from the product’s end. The transi on from online
interac on to face-to-face interac on is abrupt, which can be a barrier, especially for digital
na ves. To ease this transi on, design can act as a mediator to be er connect people with their
communi es by providing support and guidance through digital experiences. Design can help
shape a more community-friendly space to encourage people to build new rela onships with
others not only online but also in person.

14

3. Primary Research
Secondary research has analyzed the current social scene and iden fied various opportuni es
for interven on. To further study the target audience, primary research was necessary to gather
a deeper understanding of the users (the digital na ves) and their needs through a series of
interviews and focus group ac vi es. The research methods are human-centred and
collabora ve.

3.1. Research Methods
Semi-structured Interview
A series of in-depth interviews were conducted with six par cipants, aged 18 to 32, who
consider themselves digital na ves. To be er understand their experiences, the semi-structured
approach allowed the interviews to become conversa ons, which helped par cipants feel more
comfortable sharing personal stories and insights. During the interviews, par cipants were
engaged through a series of ques ons that guided them to reflect on their rela onship with
community and talk about the unique challenges they face.

Focus Group Activity
Interview par cipants who signed up for further engagement were asked to par cipate in
a focus group ac vity. Four par cipants, aged 20 to 32, were recruited. In this ac vity,
par cipants were gathered together in a room where they worked collabora vely to create a
journey map of finding and joining a community. A digital board and pens were provided for
brainstorming and organizing informa on. This collabora on model encouraged par cipants to
think and discuss openly.

3.2. Ethical Consideration
Young adults, who consider themselves digital na ves, were invited to par cipate in the project
via email. Due to the limited me and resources, invita ons were only extended to par cipants
based in Vancouver, Canada, where the project took place. The par cipants were male and
female, 18 to 32 years old, who embrace technology and have an ac ve online social presence.
All research ac vi es were held in person: the interviews were conducted one-to-one with
each par cipant, and the focus group ac vity was a collabora ve exercise with all par cipants
in the same space.
15

Before conduc ng the research, consent forms were provided to all par cipants. The
par cipants, who agreed to give consent, signed and kept one copy of the consent form. This
project’s documenta on received full Research Ethics Approval from Emily Carr University
Research Ethics Board. From an ethical standpoint, this documenta on explained the research’s
inten ons.
It was considered that there might be minimal risks associated with par cipa ng in the research
ac vi es. During the research, par cipants might be sharing personal informa on rela ng to
past experiences which might lead to emo onal responses, such as sadness and frustra on.
These feelings occur naturally when thinking about past events in everyday ac vi es. All the
informa on and data collected were confiden al. Anonymity was maintained throughout all the
par cipatory research sessions.

3.3. Analysis & Findings
The subsequent sec on reveals analysis and insights from the primary research and how this
informa on contributes to the direc on of the design solu on.

3.3.1. Semi-structured Interviews
In the earlier sec on of this study, the digital na ves’ preferences, between online and face-toface social interac ons were discussed and made evident through sta s cs. To gain a be er
understanding, semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interview ques ons centred
around the rela onships and interac ons between the par cipants and their communi es, both
online and in person.
New valuable insights were collected throughout the interviews. All six par cipants said their
communi es helped them get through difficult mes. They o en sought counsel and
perspec ves from community members who shared the same interests.

“It’s nice to have older folks in the community, who share the same interests with me, to
provide me mentorship.” - Par cipant
“I seek perspec ve from my community and learn from their experiences to make be er
decisions for myself.” - Par cipant

16

Five out of six par cipants thought technology brought them closer to their communi es
because it enables easier and faster ways of communica ng and interac ng, such as direct
messaging, reac ng to posts, and so on. They also appreciated social media for reconnec ng
them with old friends and distant rela ves.

“I recently found my elementary school’s Facebook page, where I reconnected with many old
friends. ”- Par cipant

However, through the interview process, par cipants also realized that they had become
disconnected from the people around them. They found approaching new people in person was
more difficult than online, moreover, they were not mo vated to step out of their comfort zones
to connect with strangers.

“I’ve just realized that I’ve never talked to my neighbours. I don’t even know who they are.”
- Par cipant
“Well, I don’t know if I want to get out of my way to get to know strangers, just because they
live next door. ” - Par cipant

3.3.2. Focus Group Activity
From interviews it was evident that community plays an important role to digital na ves,
however, convenience is s ll the priority. To learn more about their mental model in finding and
connec ng with new communi es, a focus group ac vity was conducted with four par cipants
from previous interviews who signed up for further engagement.
The par cipants were asked to discuss and create a step-by-step journey of searching, joining
and engaging with a community. The ac vity started with a group discussion, which helped
par cipants ques on and reflect on how they have been interac ng with their communi es.
Wri ng down the journey step-by-step allowed them to think more systema cally about their
decision-making processes.

17

Fig 9. Focus group ac vity

18

Through teamwork and conversa on, new insights emerged. First of all, the process of finding
and deciding to join a community is more difficult than it appears. The par cipants shared the
challenges they face searching for communi es online, especially local communi es. All four
par cipants usually take more than one week to decide to join a community, because of the
commitment and me it requires.

“I o en procras nate making decisions because I keep thinking about the me and energy I
will have to invest.” - Par cipant
“ There is too much commitment, I can’t just leave whenever I want. It’s not like hi ng the
‘unfollow’ bu on, on social media.” - Par cipant

Moreover, a er joining a community, they prefer to interact with other members online for
security reasons. They o en avoid or hesitate to a end community offline events. Overall, there
are more pain points than rewards in the journey of connec ng with a new community.

3.4. Design Direction
Many valuable insights were shared through interviews and the focus group ac vity. To start
brainstorming on a design direc on that not only solves the user’s pain points but also meets
the user’s needs, it was important to analyze the user’s mental model.

3.4.1. User’s Mental Model
Building a user mental model helps synthesize and analyze the collected qualita ve data. A
user’s mental model is an internal explana on that the user has built about how a par cular
system works. As Don Norman says (1990), it is a natural human response to an unfamiliar
situa on to begin building an explanatory model a piece at a me.
The user’s mental model was built based on the user’s journey of connec ng with a new
community. Each step of the journey is made up of mul ple mental stages, which present the
user’s thought process.

19

Fig 10. Components of the user’s mental model

Under each mental stage, the user engages with pieces of thought or ac on. The study
thoroughly analyzed each part of the mental model to iden fy pain points and design
opportuni es.

Fig 11. Components of the user’s mental model

20

The completed user’s mental model includes 5 steps: before joining a community, joining a
community, a er joining a community, lingering, and leaving a community. Visualizing the
mental model helps recognize design opportuni es. For instance, at a glance, some steps appear
to be longer than others, which means the user spends more thought and energy during these
parts of the journey. That is where design can help improve the user experience.

Fig 12. User Metal Model

On a more granular level, the study pinpoints numerous opportuni es for further explora ons.
Some of the highlights are

1. The search process is me-consuming
2. A ending in-person gatherings is inconvenient
3. The pressure of commi ng to a community is a barrier
4. There are safety and privacy concerns when joining a public community
5. The user doesn’t feel mo vated to build in-person connec ons

3.4.2. User Persona
The construc on of the persona allowed for a deeper understanding and empathy for the user.
The persona was created based on research findings. The user profile represents young digital
na ves, 18-34 years old. They are in the process of becoming independent, as they break away
from their family’s shelter. During this transi on, they might be moving to new places to pursue
higher educa on or to start building their careers, which means they need to build new
rela onships and connect with new communi es. However, this process can be challenging,
especially for digital na ves. Since they are more comfortable and familiar with virtual human
interac on via digital means, in-person interac on can be in mida ng. They are torn between
what they need and what they want.

21

22

4. Design Outcome
Through various research ac vi es, the study defined the targeted users and iden fied their
needs. The next phase of the project was exploring different direc ons to scope a design
solu on that would fulfill the user’s needs and expecta ons. The design outcome aimed to
assist users in building rela onships with their communi es, using technology as a tool to
support community interac on.

4.1. Scope Design Solution
The user’s mental model has pointed out the challenges users faced through their journey of
finding and connec ng to a new community. To start scoping the design outcome, a
brainstorming session on poten al solu ons was carried out, based on insights from the user’s
mental model. The brainstorming con nued to expand from solu on ideas to technical features,
which could be incorporated into the design outcome.

Fig 13. User’s mental model and func ons & Solu on brainstorming

23

This exercise s mulated the design process, which resulted in crea ve and unexpected ideas.
A er brainstorming, all poten al design ideas were evaluated, based on the user persona and
the collected insights from previous research ac vi es. In conclusion, a set of criteria were
developed to ensure that the design outcome will fulfill the user’s needs and accommodate the
user’s journey.

1. Mobile and accessible
2. Convenient and efficient
3. Secure and private
4. Shallow learning curve
5. Customized user experience
6. Support in-app communica on
7. Reduce the stress of face-to-face social interac ons
8. Mi gate the pressure of commitment
9. Mo vate community interac ons
10. Promote local communi es

4.2. Design Concept
The design concept was created by considering the insights gathered from the user research.
Ini ally, it was developed to help users overcome the pressure of face-to-face interac on
through a hybrid social experience. In this experience, mediated interac on was integrated into
the physical space, which allowed users to build in-person connec ons within their comfort
zone. From here, the concept con nued to expand, based on the criteria defined previously
(sec on 4.1). During the idea on process, there were also other considera ons besides the
user’s needs, involving numerous opportuni es for improving the current online social space,
which were iden fied through secondary research (sec on 2.2). The design solu on aims to
reinvigorate the current social scene and promote a balanced social life for the digital na ves.
There are five key aspects to the design concept

1. Native Mobile App
The solu on is a digital product, in the form of a na ve mobile applica on (app). Since the
target users are tech-savvy young adults, who priori ze convenience and efficiency, a mobile
app is the most suitable form for an everyday digital tool. Moreover, having access to the
device’s na ve func onali es, such as camera, live loca on, text and more, enables unique
features on the app.
24

2. Hyperlocal Community Platform
The app is a hyperlocal community pla orm that connects users with the communi es around
them, based on loca on and shared interests. The app provides users with a map view of
community ac vi es nearby, which are hosted by other members or local businesses. In the
context of this project, community includes, not only the people but also the local businesses,
such as mom-and-pop shops, restaurants and bars. This aspect is further explained below (5.
Promote Local Communi es).

Fig 14. Design concept

25

Besides in-person ac vi es, the app also connects people through online discussion topics,
where members share interests and start conversa ons. The topics are a ached to specific
areas or loca ons, which are defined by the creators. Only users who are in the areas can
view and join discussions. This feature highlights the ght-knit local community aspect of
this pla orm.

Fig 15. Design concept

26

3. Hybrid Social Experience
The core value proposi on of this app is the hybrid social experience it provides to users, by
blending mediated interac ons into the physical space. When users a end an event or ac vity,
they can get to know others through group messaging, sharing images and more, before
ini a ng in-person interac on. This experience acts as a middle layer between the virtual and
physical worlds to help ease the transi on. To ensure privacy, the hybrid experience is limited to
members, who previously signup for the specific ac vity and are present at the loca on.

Fig 16. Design concept

27

4. Customized User Experience
During account onboarding, users are asked if they want to allow the system to access their
loca ons and collect users’ data while using the app. Based on the data that users agree to
share, the system will generate customized content for each user. For example, the app
suggests ac vi es that users might be interested in based on users’ past data or nearby
ac vi es based on users’ loca on.
Customized content is a common product strategy, especially amongst social media pla orms.
Many businesses are capitalizing on private data to generate revenue from adver sements, and
o en me users are not aware of how their data are being used. To ensure data transparency,
the app prompts access requests, every me users log in. Moreover, users can stop data sharing
at any me, under the privacy se ngs.

Fig 17. Design concept

28

5. Promote Local Communities
During interviews (sec on 3.3.1), users men oned that they feel disconnected from the
physical community – many of them don’t know their neighbours. The pla orm hopes to
connect the users with the people around them by promo ng local communi es. As men oned
previously, the design solu on aims to support not only the users but the community as a
whole, which includes local businesses. The pla orm allows these businesses to offer special
deals and discounts, which are available for community members in the area. This feature
mo vates users to visit local businesses, where they might meet other people, so both members
and businesses can par cipate in building the local community.

Fig 18. Design concept

29

4.3. Design Prototype
The design concept (sec on 4.2) was developed into a detailed prototype that highlights the
different features and what they offer to users. The prototype brought the design concept to
life and put the product solu on into perspec ve.

Fig 19. Design prototype

30

Fig 20. Design prototype

31

Fig 21. Design prototype

32

Fig 22. Design prototype

33

Fig 23. Design prototype

34

5. Reflection & Future Direction
5.1. Insights & Learning
The research started with the ques on, “how can design assist community interac on in the
digital age?”

Design Solution
The solu on was designed for young digital na ves, to enhance their journey of connec ng
with others in person. The project chooses to focus on this user group because, based on
sta s cs and exis ng studies (sec on 1), they are the most ac ve on social media yet struggle
with in-person social interac on. Young adults, in this age group, are o en torn between their
needs and wants. They embrace and rely on technology for everyday social interac on.
However, as they are star ng to navigate life as independent individuals, they need to build new
connec ons in the physical world. The design solu on facilitates and encourages community
interac on via digital technology. Through this medium, the service can reach the target
audience and fit into their daily digital ac vi es.
Even though the ini al target audience is young adults, aged 18-34 years old, the design
solu on can be beneficial to a broader group of audiences. Because of the limited scope, the
project needed to start with a narrower group of users to ensure that the design outcome is
able to cover the users’ specific needs. However, the user’s mental model (sec on 3.4.1) is also
true for people beyond the age range of 18-34 years old; it represents anyone who relies on
digital media and loses their connec on with others in the physical world. The design solu on is
meant to support those, who are looking for a suitable channel to build connec ons, by
providing them with the tool and guidance to create a more balanced social life. Therefore, it
has the poten al to serve a larger group of users.

User-centred Research
Having poten al users par cipate in the research process contributed tremendously to the
design outcome. Working collabora vely with par cipants brought out unexpected insights,
which helped reevaluate earlier assump ons. During interviews, they shared personal
experiences and opened up about their struggles. This added another dimension to the research
that couldn’t be achieved through secondary research. The par cipants’ stories inspired the
vision for the design project, which was to remove the pressure of face-to-face interac on and

35

reconnect people with the local community. The vision became the anchor of the project, as it
expanded. The final design outcome meets the user’s needs and wants by keeping users at the
center of the experience.

5.2. Barriers & Limitations
Due to the limited me, primary research was conducted with only a small group of par cipants
living in the city of Vancouver. Thus the research results and design solu on might not be able
to cover all use cases. The proposed solu on includes features that are crea ve and
unconven onal, which requires technical feasibility evalua on. However, that was difficult to
achieve with the available resources for this project.

5.3. Future Directions
Immediate Next Steps
The proposed solu on facilitates human-to-human interac ons, not only virtually but also in
person. Thus, safety and privacy are considered the top priori es. The current design
incorporates specific flows to make sure users are always informed about how their informa on
is shared and used in the app. For example, the system can only detect users’ loca ons if users
allow the app to access this informa on. Or, when invi ng users to join a virtual private group,
the app clearly states which personal informa on will be shared with other group members and
asks for consent. However, these only cover simple use cases. Therefore, the most immediate
next step is to ensure security for users by improving the current flow and providing addi onal
features if needed.
Another important step to move the project forward is to collect users’ feedback. Through
par cipatory ac vi es, the project was able to build rela onships with poten al users. At the
end of the research ac vi es, many of the par cipants signed up for further engagement.
Moreover, the design prototype needs to be refined before tes ng. The current prototype is
sta c, which can’t accommodate all of the different user flows. To receive comprehensive
feedback from users, an interac ve prototype is needed.

36

Long-Term Direction
As men oned previously, the design solu on has the poten al to serve a wider group of
audience, adults over 35 years old and teenagers under 18 years old. To provide service for the
new users, the product needs to be adjusted accordingly. The long-term direc on is to further
develop the product to assist different groups of users appropriately and efficiently.
First of all, further user research is necessary to understand the unique characteris cs and
needs of the new users in comparison to the current users. The new users can be categorized
into two groups, adults and minors. While research on adults can be carried out similarly to
previous research ac vi es, research on minors will need more considera ons. Since they are
under the age of 18, the research methods will have to reflect this factor. It’s important to
include parents in the research because considering the nature of the service, parental
supervision is needed for security reasons. Moreover, understanding how parents and children
interact with digital tools can be beneficial for the future itera ons of the product. Secondly, to
reduce the development effort, it’s ideal to have an interface that can accommodate all users. To
achieve this goal, the new user flows and features, need to be mapped out on top of the current
interface, so the design can be modified effec vely.

37

6. Works Cited
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018, May 31). Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018. Pew Research
Center; Pew Research Center. h ps://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/05/31/teenssocial-media-technology-2018/
Asghar, R. (2013, August 25). Organic Communica on In A Hi-Tech Age: How To Keep
“iDisorders” From Spoiling Your Career Skills. Forbes. h ps://www.forbes.com/sites/robasghar/
2013/04/25/organic-communica on-in-a-hi-tech-age-how-to-keep-idisorders-from-spoilingyour-career-skills/?sh=3479d5c84e82
Atwood, J. D. (2011). The Effects of the Internet on Social Rela onships. iUniverse.
Barnhart, B. (2022, March 2). Social media demographics to drive your brand’s online presence.
Sprout Social. h ps://sproutsocial.com/insights/new-social-media-demographics/
Baym, N. K. (2015). Personal connec ons in the digital age. Polity.
Buckingham, D., & Wille , R. (2010). Digital genera ons : children, young people, and new
media. Routledge.
Feenberg, A., & Barney, D. (2004). Community in the Digital Age. Rowman & Li lefield
Publishers.
Friedman, T. (2017, January 10). Human Interac on in the Digital Age. The Aspen Ins tute.
h ps://www.aspenins tute.org/blog-posts/thomas-friedman-human-interac on-digital-age/
Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and Internet connec vity effects. Informa on,
Communica on & Society, 8(2), 125–147. h ps://doi.org/10.1080/13691180500146185
Kemp, S. (2022, July 21). The Global State of Digital in July 2022. DataReportal – Global Digital
Insights. h ps://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-july-global-statshot
Lenhart, A. (2015, August 6). Chapter 4: Social Media and Friendships. Pew Research Center:
Internet, Science & Tech. h ps://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/08/06/chapter-4-socialmedia-and-friendships/

38

Lieberman, M. D. (2013). Social : why our brains are wired to connect. Crown Publ.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital na ves, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. h ps://
doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital na ves, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. h ps://
doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Stout, H. (2010, April 30). How Does Technology Affect Kids’ Friendships? The New York Times.
h ps://www.ny mes.com/2010/05/02/fashion/02BEST.html
Thompson, J. B. (2018). Mediated Interac on in the Digital Age. Theory, Culture & Society,
37(1) 3–28, 026327641880859. h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418808592
Vogels, E. (2019, September 9). Millennials Stand out for Their Technology use, but Older
Genera ons Also Embrace Digital Life. Pew Research Center. h ps://www.pewresearch.org/
fact-tank/2019/09/09/us-genera ons-technology-use/
Ziglioli, G., & Alhassan, A. Y. (2022). Nethnography and Social Network Analysis for Studying
Online Social Space. Handbook of Research on Advanced Research Methodologies for a Digital
Society, 227–247. h ps://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8473-6.ch015

39

7. Appendix
7.2. List of Figures
Fig1. Four types of interac on. (Thompson, 2020)
Fig 2. Five main components of community pla orms
Fig 3. Compe

ve research test flow

Fig 4. Compe

ve analysis

Fig 5. Face-to-face interac on and Online mediated Interac on comparison
Fig 6. Face-to-face interac on and Online mediated Interac on comparison
Fig 7. Local communi es search func ons analysis
Fig 8. Local communi es search func ons analysis
Fig 9. Focus group ac vity
Fig 10. Components of the user’s mental model
Fig 11. Components of the user’s mental model
Fig 12. User Metal Model
Fig 13. User’s mental model and func ons & Solu on brainstorming
Fig 14. Design concept
Fig 15. Design concept
Fig 16. Design concept
Fig 17. Design concept
Fig 18. Design concept
Fig 19. Design prototype
Fig 20. Design prototype
Fig 21. Design prototype
Fig 22. Design prototype
Fig 23. Design prototype

40

7.2. App Screens

41

42

43