Category:
Mobile Design
Client:
Remind Lab
My Role
Researcher and Designer
Duration
4 Months From Jan'25 to Apr'25
Methods
Research: Surveys, Interviews, Competitor Analysis
Design: Rapid Prototyping, High-Fidelity Prototyping, Usability Testing
Getting Started
Everyday unpleasant memories are hard to express and even harder to process.
People tend to remember negative experiences more vividly than positive ones. These memories shape our self-image, emotional well-being, and how we approach the future.
Figure: “It’s more important for people, for survival, to notice the lion in the brush than it is to notice the beautiful flower that’s growing on the other side of the way,” - Laura Carstensen
How might we support deeper reflection on unpleasant memories without letting users spiral?
*Deliberately chose not to approach the topic from a clinical or therapeutic perspective, to keep the focus on everyday reflection and emotional processing rather than diagnosis or treatment.
However, the data generated through this tool could potentially support therapists as a supplemental view into a client’s emotional patterns and self-reflections, if the user chooses to share it.
Research Goals
How do people capture, express, share, and reflect on their unpleasant memories?
What are the individuals’ needs and strategies to process unpleasant memories?
How do individual differences in reflection and rumination tendency change individuals’ unpleasant memory
processes?
Methodology
Literature Review:
We analyzed key industry players (Booking.com, Expedia, Orbitz) to identify best practices in checkout experiences, pricing transparency, and bundling strategies.
Surveys:
We started by piloting a small-scale survey to refine our questions based on initial responses. Based on feedback, we adjusted questions to ensure clarity, depth, and participant comfort.
Figure: Qualtrics Survey Structure
Key Findings:
Divergent Needs: Reflectors V/S Ruminators
Different people (reflectors and ruminators) have different attitudes towards technology, and their needs differ.
Role of Social Context in Memory Processing
Participants displayed individual and social acceptance plays a role in the processing of unpleasant memories.
Distinct Technology Engagement Patterns
They engage with memory technologies differently. Reflectors do not trust the effect of technology, and they have a separate processing phase, while ruminators prefer expressive outlets and need to communicate with others, in addition to trusting the influence of technology
Figure: Memory Processing Model and Motivations of Individuals In Each Stage
Figure: Comparison of Reflectors vs. Ruminators
Solution
Step 01: Add Memory – Describe
This screen initiates the reflection process by prompting users to capture the memory they want to process. Users can write about their experience, record a voice note, or upload an image that visually represents the moment. The goal is to let users externalize the event in their own way.
From survey insights, many users preferred open-ended, venting-style input over structured templates. Providing multimodal input methods accommodates different emotional states and cognitive preferences. It also reduces the friction of starting a memory log, especially during overwhelming moments. This screen prioritizes accessibility, flexibility, and emotional comfort.
Step 02: Add Memory – Emotions
This screen supports users in identifying and labeling the emotions tied to the memory they described. Users can enter freeform emotional reflections or select from suggested emotional tags.
Reflection becomes deeper when emotions are explicitly acknowledged. By offering both open text and emotion tags, this screen balances structure with personal nuance. The emotional palette helps users who struggle with articulating their feelings while still allowing freedom for more expressive users.
Step 03: Add Memory – Goal
In this step, users clarify their intention for reflection what they hope to gain or understand better from this memory. They can select from seeded prompts or write their own goal.
Survey findings revealed that users appreciated reflective tools that guide, but do not dictate, their thinking. This screen nudges users to consider the purpose behind their reflection, encouraging intentionality. It also informs the type of AI insights they will receive later, personalizing the guidance.
AI Insights – Reflection Cards
Once a memory is added, users receive AI-generated insights based on their described experience and reflection goal. These come in the form of reflective questions, alternative perspectives, or gentle reframes.
Many users expressed a need for prompts to help them think more deeply, but disliked overly directive responses. These responses use reflective psychology not advice but to trigger thinking. Insights will be related to:
Reframing: Offers new perspectives to reduce spiraling.
Socratic Questions: Gently prompts deeper self-inquiry.
Coping Aids: Suggests grounding tools and emotion-labeling.
Forward Thinking: Encourages clarity and next steps.
Memory Detail Page - 01
This page aggregates the entire reflection for a memory entry, including the user’s input, AI insights, and follow-up interactions. It allows the user to revisit or continue their journey with the memory.
Memory Detail Page - 02
By centralizing all related content, this screen supports longitudinal reflection. Users can track emotional growth, revisit key insights, and decide whether to continue reflecting or bring closure. It respects the non-linear nature of emotional processing.
Test Summary Results
What worked well
Users appreciated emotional pacing and gentle tone
2.
One-insight-per-day felt manageable and helpful
3.
Emotion tagging and AI-generated prompts were described as “supportive” and “reassuring,” especially for users who struggled to articulate their thoughts.
Areas for improvement
Some users wanted an easier way to revisit follow-ups and past inputs, prompting a refinement in the memory detail page and homepage timeline status cues.
2.
The doodling input was appreciated as expressive, but its functionality was not always intuitive or clearly differentiated from decorative illustrations.
3.
The initial separation of describe and insight created confusion about how the reflection flow progressed. Users weren’t sure what to expect after each AI prompt.