Proposed hypothesis
Which personalisation actually helps a traveller?
A small set of goal-focused questions may yield a more useful itinerary than a long preference questionnaire.
Offer your expertise →The catalogue presents potential research directions. A published hypothesis does not imply open recruitment, an approved budget or data access. We agree on each task’s terms before work begins.
Context
Travellers differ in time, budget, interests and pace. We propose testing which questions improve the plan.
What we test
A small set of goal-focused questions may yield a more useful itinerary than a long preference questionnaire.
Why it matters
Reduce planning effort while preserving user control.
What is known
Personalisation is a lab direction; comparative results for this use case are not yet available.
Data and resources
Synthetic profiles and voluntary interviews without unnecessary personal data.
Test plan
Compare a short and current planning flow; observe time, corrections and plan acceptance.
Primary metric
Share of users accepting a verified plan.
Success and stop criteria
Monitor planning time, critical errors and clarification count. An attractive response is not proof of usefulness.
Skills and contribution
UX researcher, product specialist and analyst. Contribution: interview scenarios, a question-flow prototype and measurement plan.
Timing
Agree after defining data, scope and comparison.
Participation terms
Propose a research contribution, project work or partnership. Agree on payment, rights, access and publication separately before starting.
Ownership
Assign hypothesis and business owners, delivery and measurement responsibilities before starting.
Evidence pack
A hypothesis brief, baseline, comparison protocol, observations, errors and a scale, iterate or stop decision. Public evidence excludes confidential data.
Have an approach to this question?
Share one relevant example and the contribution you propose. This hypothesis will already be selected in the form.