Optional Categorization of Post by Intention (Cell D7, UX/UI idea #4)

[billiedemott]

Idea: For additional productivity of the platform - use optional categorization of posts by intentions, e.g. - I'm asking for feedback, I need a cheer up, etc. More info in the note

Additional Comment: When user posts an entry they could optionally tag their entry with their expectations about what they want others to do about it: give advice/answer question, feedback, cheer up, or just hear out their spout. This will not only provide users will clear expectations on what type of reaction/feedback to their entries they can expect on Spoutlets, when used as content filters it will also provide quicker access to certain types of entries to both peers and therapists (e.g. if I’m a therapist, I might be filtering all entries by “Advice needed”, or if I’m a student I can just filter the list by entries that need cheer up and just “share my love” :) So consumers of the content can choose what to see in the feed depending on what they want to do (support, answer questions, etc.)

Example of marking posts with a type can be seen on Path where they tag entries with some contextual events: http://screencast.com/t/temStwHty

[billiedemott]

My comment:

I gave some feedback about this in Issue # 174, but here are some additional thoughts.

1. This screenshot is super helpful! It shows how we can make tagging less cumbersome. The icons make it more delightful to use.
2. That being said, I think we need to keep the settings for each entry pretty simple. We have to choose what the most pertinent/desirable actions are. Too many choices in actions & settings is overwhelming/causes paralysis. We should bear in mind Hick’s law.
3. I think a user should be able to: add an entry, add mood color, add event/context & choose if they want feedback. That’s it (aside from choosing to make entry “private”).

(We could make a little icon tag for feedback. By adding this, a user adds a comment box beneath their entry to indicate to other users that they should provide feedback.

• Additionally, these posts asking for feedback can be sent to the public feed so people see it & comment.
• Also, when someone logs in, they can be nudged to give feedback on some of these posts – like what was done in Aardvark. )
  1. I think a clickback like “been there” should always be there, by default. It shouldn’t be a choice. (We can discuss other additional clickbacks, maybe something like “Hang in,” instead of “Cheer up.” I’ve gotten feedback that cheer up is too stuffy & dry. I think there should be one clickback that lets people show support, and one that lets people relate/indicate to person that what they’re experiencing happens & it is ok.
  2. I think a user should be able to make their entry private or public. If they make it private, it is not shown to anyone else & disables the clickback & the feedback option.

I use the below kind of interactions in life to think about the above.

Sometimes when I am about to say something personal to someone, I say this: “ok, I’m telling you this, not so you respond, but just because I need to get this off my chest.” Then I say what I need to say, and my friend might tap my shoulder or say it will be ok. Sometimes, they will start responding with more detail, but I let them know that I really don’t want feedback. I just needed to let it out. I think the clickback is that tap on the back or the “it’s going to be ok” assurance.

Sometimes when I say something personal to someone, I let it out & then I say “what do you think?” or “what do you advise?” That’s their cue to give me feedback. I think tagging that I want feedback is the equivalent to that conversational cue.

Sometimes I have a voice in my head that reflects or acknowledges a feeling I’m having, I think that private moment of self-reflection is the equivalent of making an entry & keeping it private.

These are my thoughts on how to simplify & pair down. And also I tried to show where my thoughts were deriving from.

What do you think? Are there other moments in this sort of sharing to consider simulating?

[theoxygenated]

Billie, I'll reply to the above a bit later, now I'm just posting here my earlier comment related to the topic to keep things in one place:

If we do categorization of entries by their intent what do you think those categories should be? I can see that the following would be useful:

• asking for a specific advice, it's like posting a question on forum (e.g "what are tips for prepping for presentation with tight deadline and not go crazy?")
• wanting reaction/support/feedback on something that's happened/was posted (e.g. "My mom just snapped at me and it made me cry for an hour")
• something like an achievement - something positive users might want to share/to be proud of (e.g. "I finally could eat my favorite sandwich without thinking about calories! Hooray!")
• wanting just a little cheer up (e.g. "I'm just sad today")
• private entry (of course in this case this type would not be among filters for other users, only for the owner of the account)

Do you think any of these need to have custom rules as to what options are available for other users to engage? Or if you don't use any of these types it's enough to just have a checkbox when you're adding entry that says something like "I don't wan't anyone to do anything about it"?

[billiedemott]

Ok great. Thanks, Marina! Glad you put that in, think that fell under the radar & adds additional color to your idea.

[theoxygenated]

Thanks for the input, Billie!

I agree completely with your thoughts, so essentially when user creates an entry the system assumes by default that user doesn't need any reaction (except for standard for all public entries "hang in" and "been there"), so it would be user's job to indicate if they want reaction.

Couple of things to consider here:

• the wording for indicating that you want reaction should probably be mood neutral. The more I look through peoples journals, the more I see that positive moods occur pretty much in the same amount as negative ones. I probably haven't seen really depressed people journals though, however I still think that with feedback option we should also accommodate those that want people to react to happy entries, achievements, something to be proud of. After all, that's how self esteem can go up and depressed people often have very low self esteem and delusions about themselves. So the feedback option should be multipurpose.
• Analyzing personas I thought that many archetypes actually don't have adequate knowledge of their condition and probably have a lot of very specific questions. (e.g. is [something] normal? how to explain things to my professor? should I take medications? etc.) So these are not really spoutlets, these are attempts to reach for very concrete information. Do you think we should have a mechanism for posting this kind of questions?

[billiedemott]

Excellent!

Bullet #1: Yes, yes! I completely agree & I think this is an excellent point. Here are some prelim ideas for neutral copy:

Open to comments Open to feedback Open to responses

Open for comments Open for feedback Open for responses

Not sure whether “to” or “for” is better. What’s your immediate response? Do you feel these are neutral?

I’ll also brainstorm more copy as well.

Bullet #2: I think when a user wants to reach out for concrete information, that’s when we offer them the ability to search for a therapist & have an online session to ask the therapist those questions. Those types of questions you listed are the sorts of questions therapists are trained at answering & understanding. Does that kind of flow make sense to you?

[theoxygenated]

:) I'm not sure, maybe its best to base the wording on someone's who has English as their mother tongue opinion. From just a glance for me "to" sounds stronger but also somehow more official.

Bullet #2:

This is related to: https://github.com/spoutlets/spoutlets.com/issues/169

My concern here is that many people might not be ready to commit to a therapy session just because they have a question to ask. In this case scheduling a therapy session might be an obstacle to getting the information, simply because psychologically it requires more effort than just throwing your question out there for some professional to answer.

We can continue on this in 169 issue

[billiedemott]

Haha, thanks Marina. I've been using the phrasing with "to" in my emails, so I think that shows my preference. I'll ask those of the mother tongue (love this phrase).

Yes, I definitely see your point. I think there are a lot of obstacles to the implementation of such a thing (as good as it sounds), so let's table it for the future.