← Back to Work
Usability research
Transit App Usability Evaluation
It’s Wednesday. You need to be at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) by 2 PM with a suitcase in town. What’s the best way to get there?
This case study evaluates how well the Transit app supports riders as they plan a trip and compare routes.
Heuristic evaluation
Competitive analysis
Usability testing
🧳 SFO by 2 PM!
Least walking? 🤔
Role: Contributed to the interface evaluation and improvement ideas, surveys and post-test questionnaire, usability sessions, and data analysis.
Team: Four members
Understanding the User Experience
Riders often have to choose a route and a departure time while standing on a busy platform or in an unfamiliar place. This evaluation examined whether Transit’s interface supports those decisions or creates barriers.
Research question
Can riders quickly plan a trip and compare route options with confidence?
Methods
A heuristic evaluation and a comparison with Citymapper and Moovit, followed by moderated usability testing with seven participants.
Research Process
We started by reviewing the interface against usability heuristics and comparing it with similar apps, then watched real participants use it.
Heuristic Evaluation
Reviewed the main trip planning screens against established usability heuristics and design principles.
Key insight: Essential trip-planning options were difficult to discover, while the continuous route timeline made comparisons less intuitive.
Comparative Analysis
Compared Transit with Citymapper and Moovit, focusing on how each app helps riders choose between routes.
Key insight: Citymapper’s separate route cards and Moovit’s sorting options made comparing routes much easier than in Transit.
Usability Testing
Seven participants completed three timed tasks while thinking aloud, then rated task ease and clarity.
Key insight: Route comparison had the lowest success rate and clarity rating of any task.
Usability Testing
Seven people we knew, from classmates to family members, completed three timed tasks based on the same scenario, a trip to the airport with an arrival deadline. A task counted as a success when the participant completed it without help. Tasks were timed, but there was no time limit. Participants thought aloud while working and shared more comments after each task. They then rated task ease and clarity on a seven-point scale, from very difficult or unclear at the low end to very easy or clear at the high end. Comparing what participants said with their task times and ratings showed where they struggled and why.
Task 1
Plan the trip
Most participants completed the task, but it took the longest on average. Most of that time was spent locating the arrive-by setting.
71%
Success
3:42
Avg. time
5.0 / 7
Ease
5.1 / 7
Clarity
Task 2
Pick the route with the least walking
Only 4 of 7 participants selected the route with the least walking, and clarity was the lowest of any task at 2.4.
57%
Success
2:30
Avg. time
3.0 / 7
Ease
2.4 / 7
Clarity
Task 3
Read the route details
All participants completed the task, but ease and clarity ratings of 4.6 suggest it still took effort.
100%
Success
1:20
Avg. time
4.6 / 7
Ease
4.6 / 7
Clarity
In the post-test questionnaire, 6 of 7 participants reported being dissatisfied with the app. Average utility was 3.57 / 7 and satisfaction was 2.71 / 7.
Key Usability Findings
1
2
3
Finding 1
Weak visual grouping
Route options share one continuous horizontal timeline, and arrival time, transfers, and walking distance appear in different places for each route. Most errors during testing happened on this screen.
1
Routes are drawn along one shared timeline instead of separate cards, so they blend together
2
Trip details are cut off on the right, with no hint to scroll
3
There’s no option to sort by walking, time, or transfers
Finding 2
Hidden affordances
The origin field and arrive-by option only appear after tapping into search. Finding the arrive-by setting accounted for most of the time spent on Task 1, and several participants lost their progress after accidentally swiping out of the menu.
1
The starting point field stays hidden until you tap search
2
“Leave now” doesn’t look like something you can change as it appears as a grey button
3
The arrive-by option becomes visible only after clicking the "Leave now" button
1
2
3
Finding 3
Inconsistent signifiers
The primary GO button changes color depending on the route. Red matches the cancel button (red circle with white X) on the same screen, and gray can read as a button that's not working even though it is.
Red, same as cancel button
Gray, looks disabled
Green, reads as go
Design Recommendations
Based on the evaluation and testing results, these changes would better support route decisions. The problems that made planning a trip and choosing a route harder came first, since those are what people use a transit app for the most.
Separate route cards
Show arrival time, walking, transfers, and total route time in the same place on every route so options can be compared at a glance.
Sorting options
Let riders sort routes by what matters most to them, such as the route with least walking or the fewest transfers.
More discoverable planning tools
Show the starting point and arrive-by time on the first screen so riders can set up a trip right away.
A consistent primary action button
Use one color for GO, and reserve line colors for identifying transit lines.
Reflection & Next Steps
This project gave me hands-on experience with the full usability evaluation process, from reviewing the interface and comparing it with competitors to designing our own testing protocol and analyzing the results. Watching participants work through the app showed me how bright line colors pulled their attention away from key trip details, and that finishing a task does not always mean the experience felt easy. Looking at performance data together with ratings and think-aloud comments helped us understand not only where participants struggled but also why.
Our study was also limited in some ways. We worked with seven participants who mostly did not ride transit often, and they tested the app without taking a real trip. A field study with regular riders on an actual commute would be a natural next step to see how well these patterns hold up in everyday use.
Made with love · © 2026 Anusha Barua