# Enhancing User Experience with Visual Controls for Local Differential Privacy
## 6 User Study
### Qualitative Insights  
The study surfaced multiple constructive and positive themes, highlighting where the interface excelled and where refinements are needed.  
1. Users found the interface visually clear and approachable across all tasks, and participants complimented the overall layout, the simplicity of the navigation, and the interface's resemblance to existing systems (e.g., Alexa and Google Home). The use of a centralized dashboard with visual feedback was well received. _\"This interface is very clear and shows sufficient information in one page... better than Google's.\" \"I liked the visual feedback--moving the slider instantly shows changes.\"_ Several participants also found the graph-based personalization model more understandable than traditional privacy settings. They noted that it made the consequences of privacy choices more visible.
2. Explanations under the slider were ignored or misunderstood most users did not read the explanatory text beneath the privacy slider. This appeared to be due to both visual placement and technical wording. Several participants voiced a desire for practical, real-world examples of how privacy levels would affect their smart home experience: _\"I'm not sure what I'm looking at... can I click?\" \"To technical... not sure what this means if you don't know about privacy or data.\"_ This suggests both relocation of explanatory content, possibly with interactive tooltips or the use of scenario-based previews tied to each setting (e.g., \"Your music suggestions may become less accurate\") to enhance clarity.
3. Transformation table was confusing and may be optional nearly all participants expressed confusion with the \"Data Examples\" table. Users were unclear on what \"noise added\" meant or how it affected actual device responses. While the table aimed to concretely demonstrate LDP in action, it often created more cognitive load than clarity. _\"Volume is volume before and after...not sure what this means.\" \"Is noise like background audio or something?\"_ Despite its difficulty, users recognized its intent. Future versions could either simplify the transformation logic or evaluate whether such a table is necessary at all, perhaps replacing it with animated or scenario-based demonstrations.
4. Scenario-based privacy and multi-tenant use cases emerged organically interestingly, and several participants independently brought up contextual and multi-user privacy preferences, e.g., wanting different settings at home vs. work, or per-user configurations in shared households. Though not currently part of the system, this finding aligns well with emerging research in personalized privacy control. _\"At home I want as much privacy as possible...in business, I'm fine giving more data.\" \"If more people visited, I might change it.\"_ This is a promising direction for future work--designing adaptive privacy controls that shift based on user, context, or location.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Task** & **Success** & **Failed** & **Other (Confused/Partial)** \\ \hline Task 1: Adjust Privacy Level & 5 & 0 & 1 \\ \hline Task 2: Interpret Privacy Graph & 3 & 3 & 0 \\ \hline Task 3: Understand Data Transform & 1 & 3 & 2 \\ \hline Task 4: Choose a Privacy Level & 3 & 0 & 3 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Task performance breakdown.