Actual prototype screens · New York catalogue snapshot, October 2026.
Overview
A decision companion that helps people turn vague preferences into specific places and activities.
Morrow helps people who have a general feeling but no specific plan decide what to do next. Someone might want a warm, affordable meal, a quiet break, or an evening out without knowing which restaurant, place, or activity would fit. The experience starts with that uncertainty and gradually turns it into a concrete suggestion in New York.
I first developed the concept during NYU Pre-College in July 2026. The current prototype extends it across dining and five activity directions, while keeping the central interaction small and approachable.
UX design
Decision support
AI-assisted prototyping
The Challenge
My starting question was: how can a recommendation experience help before someone knows what to search for?
A person who can describe a mood may still struggle to name a cuisine or activity. Asking for too much specificity immediately could make the first step harder. At the same time, a mood label alone is not enough: an appealing idea still needs to fit someone’s budget, location, available time, and practical requirements.
This was a design hypothesis, not a finding from a completed user study. I wanted to explore how a short sequence of choices could bridge that gap.
My Contribution
01
Frame the decision
My contribution centered on the concept, the question flow, and the decisions a result should help someone make. I defined the progression from an open feeling to specific preferences and shaped how people could respond when a suggestion felt wrong.
02
Build with AI assistance
I used AI-assisted implementation to develop these ideas into a working React prototype. Recommendations come from a curated resource set and explicit matching rules. The optional text field recognizes a limited set of keywords; it does not understand unrestricted conversation.
Process & Design
01 / THE FIRST QUESTION
Start with what someone can express
I organized the experience into five steps. The opening choices use everyday feelings rather than requiring a precise search term. Later steps introduce more concrete preferences and constraints. “Not sure” remains a valid response, so uncertainty does not stop progress.
01 · Express a feelingStart with an everyday feeling, with room to stay unsure.Actual product screenshot02 · Add a practical limitChoose a dish budget, with tax, tip and extras kept explicit.Actual product screenshot03 · Find a concrete choiceA real place, a specific dish and a reason it could fit.Actual product screenshot
02 / THE RESULT
Offer a place to start
The result presents one main recommendation and at most three alternatives at different places. For dining, this means a named restaurant and something specific to order. For activities, it means a concrete visit plan or a verified dated session. This limited set is intended to give someone a starting point without recreating a long browsing list.
03 / THE NEXT CHOICE
Make a small correction possible
I also treated an imperfect match as useful feedback. “Not quite right?” asks what feels off, then adds one short follow-up. A person can adjust cost, feeling, area, or direction while retaining their other preferences. Undo restores the previous state. The aim is to make refinement feel like a small correction instead of another full questionnaire.
Before · Dish budget up to $25Saigon Shack · Classic Beef Phở · $15.95Actual product screenshotAfter · Dish budget up to $15S’MAC · All-American Mac, Nosh · $7.45Actual product screenshot
Only the budget changes. Warmth, noodles, a sit-down meal, area and food preferences stay in place. Undo restores the previous result. Prices are recorded menu prices, before tax, tip and extras.
04 / PRACTICAL TRUST
Make the practical details count
Practical information shaped the matching rules. Budget and dietary requirements filter dining options before preference ranking. Activities also account for date, runtime, and explicit age eligibility. Under a fixed budget, unconfirmed full prices require an opt-in; unselected activity sessions have a separate opt-in. Source dates and limitations remain visible, and expired sessions leave the results. Editorial feelings are kept separate from venue facts.
Outcomes & Reflection
Prototype Coverage
Restaurants
25
Dish suggestions
53
Non-dining activity ideas
32
Prototype Coverage describes the resource set, not adoption or measured user impact.
The local prototype supports feedback, undo, saved-session recovery, and direct opening from a folder. It has undergone functional and responsive checks, but I have not yet measured satisfaction, decision time, or whether people follow through on a recommendation.
A planned usability study would ask students to begin with deliberately vague needs, think aloud, and respond to an imperfect result. I would examine where choices feel unclear and whether explanations support a confident decision. Live availability is another limitation: a sourced listing cannot guarantee opening hours, a seat, or remaining tickets.