Competitive Analysis

I downloaded and created accounts on the direct and indirect competitor's apps, and analyzed their strengths and weaknesses. I compared several direct competitors including other services under the Match group which owns Tinder. I also included 1 specialized dating service in the US which caters to a narrow demographic as well as 1 popular dating app in Japan.
In addition to this, I created two provisional personas based on the information I gathered from my market research.

User Interviews

"I got in a relationship with a guy on tinder, a month ago. A month later he broke up with me. If you match with someone you don't know anything about them. They could be lying about their whole life to you. It's scary " - Tinder user, 25F

"Catfishing is an issue. You're essentially window shopping for people. I've definitely showed up for date and the woman looks totally different. There are certain things people do to be dishonest and you can tell." - Tinder user 34M

"Tinder seems a little shady, the other apps seem more trustworthy. Catfishing, I don't know anyone personally but i've heard stories. It's a TERRIBLE situation and I dont know how often it happens. Creepy." - Tinder user 28F

I interviewed 5 subjects aged 21-34 in a semi-structured format. It included 3 females and 2 males.

• All female subjects expressed safety and trust as a concern, male and female subjects both were aware and concerned about the phenomenon known as "catfishing", where a person poses or impersonates someone else for mischievous or nefarious purposes.
• Bot/Spam accounts were mentioned by men as common yet unavoidable.
• Every subject had knowledge of Tinder, no subject expressed satisfaction with Tinder.
• Subjects tended to have more favorable views of competitors, citing difficulty developing or maintaining relationships on Tinder
• All subjects expressed a lack of common interests, difficulty in continuing conversation as a pain point
• All subjects mentioned Tinder's reputation as a "Hookup" app. No subject expressed outwardly positive opinions of Tinder
• When asked directly what they want, all subjects suggested a filter option

Define

Personas

I created 2 personas based on my customer research and user interviews.

Empathy maps

To better visualize the needs and pains of my personas, I created two empathy maps.

Ideate

HMW Questions

Understanding the intricacies of human attraction and mate selection is beyond the scope of this project and perhaps my lifetime. However, I realized that the overall goal of both personas is using tinder and other dating apps as a catalyst to build interpersonal relationships.

• How might we help Stacey feel safer using tinder?
• How might we help Garret continue conversations and build relationships with people he matches with on tinder?

Users say they want a filter

Here's why I think that's a bad idea. A filter's purpose, by definition, is to exclude something unwanted. Introducing advanced filters to Tinder would lead to excluded groups, less engagement, more uninstalls, and ultimately less users on Tinder as whole.

The Solution: Verification

For inspiration I looked to verification features currently in practice on Japanese dating and e-commerce platforms. Users must verify their accounts by submitting a picture of a government issued ID.
This would address the issue of safety and "catfishing" as well as bot and spam accounts. It also helps Tinder keep underage individuals off the platform. If users feel more secure, this may lead to increase engagement on the app via conversation and more active users.
American companies like Instagram and Twitter offer a similar verification feature for companies people in the public sphere. This shows that westerners are open to the idea.  

Task flow

I also mapped out the task flow for the verification process. The user has the option of initiating the verification process by tapping on the verified icon or someones profile or tapping on the "not verified" prompt in their own profile.

After choosing to verify, the task flow will go like this.

Wireframes

I created a set of wireframes which go through the verification process and a FAQ section.

User testing

I tested the wireframes with 5 subjects for general usability testing using Invision.

• Go through the verification process

Results

• Subjects completed the task with 100% completion rate, 0% error rate
• Only one subject read the FAQ, other stated "I didn't need it" or "I never read FAQs"
• All subjects expressed concern about submitting personal documents to Tinder
• All subjects felt that a verification feature is needed on Tinder
  
• One subject expressed that they would pay for verification, 2 others weren't interested, 2 undecided

Iterate

I incorporated some changes into my hi-fi mockups, such as moving the placement of the FAQ link above the CTA on the success screen after document submission. The reason for this being that all subjects expressed concern regarding submitting their documents to a company for verification. While the FAQ section addresses many of these concerns, only 1 out of 5 subjects decided to look at the FAQ.
Whether or not the FAQ could alleviate the concerns of those submitting documents would be the subject of additional testing.

Following suggestions from users, I also added a feature which when switched on will show only verified users when swiping. This is switched off by default.

Reflection

This was a very valuable learning experience as I got to empathize with female users and listen to their concerns about dating apps.

Although this was a concept project, Tinder has recently released their own verification feature which uses facial recognition technology rather than government ID. It would appear that Tinder's own research and findings mirror my own.
‍
You can read more about the new feature and how it compares to mine here on Medium.