Reframing the problem
If we only ask: How can we collect more feedback about the in-car experience?
The more useful question: Which decision belongs to the current development stage, and what comparison would inform it? Let that decision determine the research task.
The problem
Displays, head-up displays, touchscreens, and voice interaction can all demand driver attention. A study can produce feedback, but the team still needs to know which decision it supports: choosing a concept, preparing for production, or improving a launched product.
I worked on the method framework, tasks and measures, key studies, and coordination. The starting question became “what decision is the team making now?”
What I changed
I organized research around discovery, concept, pre-production, and post-launch work. Early studies explore directions; concept studies compare tasks and alternatives; later studies examine the full experience and real use.
Measures follow the question. Gaze helps examine attention, records preserve actions and errors, and interviews add the user’s account. Comparisons need defined tasks and conditions; scores from different stages are not automatically comparable.
Delivery
The work produced an evaluation framework used in studies and team training. One driver-behavior-system training required the team to complete data collection independently and recognize untrustworthy data.
The public account supports the method and scope of delivery. Vehicle identities, thresholds, recordings, and findings remain private, and I cannot report a public post-production improvement measure.