+

Search

Empathize

01

09

21

35

55

Ideate

Define

Empathize

Introduction

Prototype

Kepler 580What if someone came to you with the challenge...

What if you had unlimited access to Google resources, including its financing, distribution, hardware/software capabilities, and data – both universal and personal? What could you make with these resources that would help people imagine and realize better lives for themselves?

What would you design?

“How can Google help you realize what you imagine to be a better life?”

Introduction 5

But, wait!Before you design...

Take a breather - don’t jump straight to ideation.

In order to imagine a better life, you have to first discover what is wrong with life today. After all, design is not all about visuals, so we have to take some time to consider the problems we are facing. Each of us took two days to come up with two assumptions about what is wrong today, then returned to discuss them with the team.

Meet The Team

Introduction

Google + SCAD CLC 580

Jason FoxChair of Graphic Design

John McCabeProgram Coordinator,

Service Design and User Experience Design.

7

A multidisciplinary group was assembled, with backgrounds in Service Design, Graphic Design, Interactive Design, Design Management, Advertising, and Illustration. Together, this myriad of disciplines provided each team with the set of skills necessary to successfully tackle each step of the UX design process.

Our professors - Jason Fox and John McCabe - were always available to give a helping hand. They offered us a selection of crazy ideas, a breadth of knowledge, and constant motivation along the way. Late-night pizza runs, last-minute text messages, and design guidance all came as part

of the package. Their lead and direction helped the class continue to be successful.

There was an extended team of Googlers, who took the time to work with us on a weekly basis: Mike Buzzard, Jay Runquist, Elizabeth Baylor, and Utkarsh Seth. They worked with us via remote location to stay connected with our process every step of the way. However, they were not available just online. The Googlers also traveled to Savannah to help kickstart our research and branding with opening workshops.

Introduction 9

Meet Our TeamKEPLER 580

All of us were split into four teams of four by the end of week one. Google and our professors chose a diverse mix of disciplines filling the roles of:UX, Graphics, Research, and Strategy.

Micro-Teams

Xudan ZhouBeijing, China

Interactive Design

Lucia CozziRosario, Argentina

Service Design

Photography by Christopher Dowell

Andrew WagenhalsRochester, New York

Visual Design

Maria De La VegaCartagena, Colombia

Service Design

11

Empathize

Empathize

A process of gaining understanding about each other, and the way we each see the world. The empathize phase got us out of our comfort zone and allowed us to connect with others. We were able to put ourselves in the shoes of various users in contexts that are similar and very different than ours.

11

Search

Empathize

FINDING DIRECTION

13

By empathizing we were able to look closely at problems that users were having across different experiences. We searched for things that seemed off, pain points of sorts, in daily interactions and in social constructs that we take for granted. We looked at the world and extracted points of interests, things we were assuming were happening a certain way because of something that could be studied and designed.

Assumption

Empathize

GETTING SPECIFIC

15

Relocation research and planning is mainly carried out Onlineand through personal connections.

Kepler got to know each other by sharing assumptions. Assumptions about the world around us, things that define individual success and sustainable societies. The goal was to identify where we could insert ourselves to improve or create value where there is pain. We observed patterns of behavior, talked to people and among ourselves to better understand the world around us and current limitations in place. Our assumptions revolved around constant connectivity, filtering information, and guidance for decision making. Our final assumption is:

Our Users

Empathize

Youngly Professionals

17

Our users are called Youngly Professionals. They are individuals who are likely to relocate often, and share certain capabilities that differentiate their approach. They are young and in the early years of their professional careers. Youngly Professionals have relocation experience and are likely to move from 2 to 3 times every five years. They are DIY in spirit, meaning they have low tendency to employ services due to their limited financial resources. In looking for information, Youngly Professionals are attentive to detail. This means that it takes them a while to find the information they need, but eventually they find everything. Their friends and family are key to their process; as they seek information, Youngly Professionals rely on social connections as much as on the internet. Finally, due to the fact they are starting their professional careers, our user is likely to move without any company support.

1-3 relocations every 5 years

DIY spirit Slow, but steady searcher

They know people and connect

No company relocation program

Experience Willingness to employ services

Ability to navigate for information

Personal connections

Company support

Need & Value

Empathize

HOW WE CAN HELP

19

NEED

VALUE

To fill in gaps in information left by relocation research carried out throughOnline resources and personal connections.

Facilitate an increased comprehension of city compatibility.

Problem Statement

Empathize

FRAMING OUR FOCUS

21

Relocation research and planning is mainly carried out Online and through personal connections.

We have observed this problem is leaving gaps in information.

How might we improve experiences so that Youngly Professionals haveincreased understanding of city compatibility when moving?

23

Define

Define

We dove deep into who we were designing for, how they behave with their tools, information and people. Defining the user, the problem, and creating focus and milestones for success. Our user is Tom, and he has some relocation experience, and is financially independent. Although he takes a while to search online, he is patient and usually finds what he is looking for. Tom just got a job offer in NYC and is considering moving there. However, his main doubt is whether he will be able to afford the lifestyle he wants. This is where we come in.

Introduction-meet the google team - brief intro to what this is *beginning of the week*- project brief and statement- *end of the week* - split into teams, tackling problems that we defined, etc. (same for every book)

EmpathizeSearchAssumptionsDefine problem statementProcessWhoNeed Value

Define (& develop?) problem statement what we need to solve research and stuff(all team manager should start working on it, ready by Oct 22)(photos organised by phrase)

Ideatejourney maps and personasmethodsinitial conceptsfinal concepts

Prototypeconceptstestiteratefails

Iterate (Conclusion?)deliver the finalised

23

Research

Define

24 InterviewsQuota and PurposiveSamples

INTERVIEWS AND SURVEYS

25

Our research process started with contextual research methodologies such as interviews and surveys. Initial rounds of interview helped us understand why people are moving and how their individual experiences were. We understood not only the breakdown of the step-by-step process, but also the shifts in their resources and relationships as their context changed. With follow-up interviews we looked into why some people might not have been as successful. Gatherings gave us a direction rooted on user needs along the relocation experience.

64 Survey Responses

Research

Define

SECONDARY

27

Secondary research guided us to a cultural understanding of relocation and how it shapes societies. Secondary sources were useful to define a terminology that we could use to address the topic, words such as push and pull factors (reasons why people leave or go to a place) became part of our vocabulary. Census information informed about the most commonly shared reasons for relocation, such as seeking better housing and employment or education opportunities.

Insights

Define

ENSURING VALIDITY

29

1

2

3

Relocation is opportunity driven.

People develop support systems before, during, and after they move.

Achieving a sense of home is important.

Research analysis helped to define insights to guide the next phases of our design process. Kepler extracted key insights that were validated through qualitative and quantitative data points from survey respondents. The three key insights collected are presented below.

The only two reasons for relocation outlined by people were better opportunities in their educational or professional advancement. “Education, employment, dreams and family” - Interview respondent

Support systems manifest themselves in the form of information, physical objects and people-to-people contact.A high concentration of users relied heavily on others all throughout the experience (56%), as well as on information before taking a decision, with 39% saying that it was helpful to their process.

Achieving a sense of home is important, and crucial to determine success of relocation.Although people do different things, most people associate achieving a sense of home with food and unpacking. People who move for employment take from weeks to months to feel settled in, compared to people who move for education who take from days to weeks. How can we help ease this transition?

Insights

Define

EXPECTATIONS vs REALITY

31

Reality

In our research on why people left places they relocated to, we found a better understanding of the relationship between expectations and reality. Expectations are based on personal biases as well as stereotypes. Reality on the other hand is built as you experience it meaning perfect expectations are unattainable. This prompted us to ask how might we aid users so that their expectations better align with the reality they’re going to face. Expectations

How might we better align expectations with reality?

Based on personal biases and general stereotypes.

EXPECTATIONS

Built as you experience it making perfect expectations unattainable.

REALITYVS

Insights

Define

WHAT WENT WRONG

33

As we looked over our research as to why people relocated, we noticed we were missing some important information on the moving experience. What about the people who had a not so great relocation experience? We conducted additional research through a selective sample to target those who moved somewhere and decided to leave.

WHY THEY LEFTPeople chose to leave their surroundings due to difficulty with relationships, poor city compatibility, and general dissatisfaction with the opportunity they relocated for.

WHAT’S GOING ONAspects of someone’s life that lead to a not so great relocation experience are tied to level of maturity as well as a lack of experience.

Analyzing Data

Define

GETTING CLOSER TO OUR USER

35

We needed to develop a refined understanding of our user, beyond its demographic characteristics. We wanted to really understand who we needed to design for, and how they experienced technology, their resources and relationships. From interviews and surveys we observed that there are some key user capabilities that needed to be organized and mapped in order to successfully segment the user based on their needs and lifestyle.

Age, which was initially strongly considered, took a secondary role, and key differentiators involved: Experience moving, Self-reliance , navigational skills, social integration and organizational support. We mapped users and arrive at Youngly Professionals, a group of users who lie at near by areas on the categories listed above.

1-3 relocations every 5 years

DIY spirit Slow, but steady searcher

They know people and connect

No company relocation program

52% 77% 69% 47% 68%

37

Ideate

Ideate

The relocation process is complex; exactly where it starts and finishes is blurred, but there are clear points of focus where our need resides. In the Ideation phase digital concepts populated our conversation, and slowly we moved into the idea of a Voice of Reason that translates information for users to compare information across cities and make informed decisions. One hundred dollars isn’t worth the same everywhere, cultural norms and behaviors change to affect perception, and some neighborhoods might be nicer than others. However, some of these meaty details about a place often go by unmentioned. Our mission is to fill in the research that future relocators need to make decisions. In this way, we might create better expectations of reality - helping our user strengthen their comprehension.

37

Persona Generation

Ideate

EMPATHY MAPPING

39

With a refined understanding of our user group and their need we developed a persona that could provide more focused examples of the relocation experience. From the sample that we interviewed and surveyed we created a profile that characterized an individual user. Tom is 26 years old, and he is a great example of a Youngly Professional. He is currently in his first job out of school, living and working in Atlanta, USA. Tom just received a job offer in New York and is considering to make the move. His decision is based on him growing tired of Atlanta and thinking that moving will allow him to save more money.

Meet Tom

Ideate

OUR PERSONA

41

Male

26

Aquarius

Single

Atlanta, GA Business

TOM

ATL NYC

The User Journey

Ideate

MAPPING TOM’S MOVE

43

We identified the main actions that Tom would take in his process of moving from Atlanta to New York, then we mapped the experience in a User Journey diagram. The tool displays the actions carried out, along lists of the objects, people and information that are involved at each phase. Tom’s journey starts when he gets a job offer that prompts him to move to a new city, continues through his process of researching, planning the move, getting to the new place, and ends when Tom achieves a sense of home.

The User Journey

Ideate

MAPPING TOM’S MOVE

45

Opportunity to relocate

Thinking about it

Weighing decision

Making the decision

Making arrangements

Planning thephysical move

The move Arriving tonew home

Buildingroots

Fleshing out the opportunity

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

Many people, many times

Make or break point

Pain point

User Needs

Ideate

JOURNEY TAKEAWAYS

47

From a cross-compare of data insights and the user journey we mapped needs that Tom and other users are having at different points of the experience. Then, we were able to easily label which problems were faced by many people at many times, which were pain points, and which points needed to be considered as make/breakpoints. These acted like filters, to highlight which needs were more important to pursue, as they were being shared by most users, across the experience and not at just one point singled-out. Points of concentration appeared when users were thinking of moving, and when they actually arrived at their new home. Key needs are:

Can I afford the lifestyle I want where I am going?

How will my new home align with my interests?

What do I do with the stuff I don’t need?

1

2

3

Concepting

Ideate

SOLUTION GENERATION

49

Through gamestorming techniques we conceptualized services and products to target the different needs that users relocating have. Our concepts were presented by describing the system in which they would exist, and which they would create, without fixating on technology and functions. Developing a pool of ideas allowed us to affinitize concepts, looking into what needs they were focused on and how they could be threaded to create solid ideas. We developed three final concepts that had focus on different user needs.

Initial Concepts

Ideate

REFINING SOLUTIONS

51

A scout that suggests what to do with things you don’t need anymore.

Opportunity...Facilitate quick problem solving, promote exchange, and give back to the community.

A collective memory to explore the heart of a place.

Opportunity...Better align expectations of lifestyle in a place, and cultivate a sense of community and belonging.

A voice of reason to translate information and compare value between contexts.

Opportunity...Help users create more realistic goals, and facilitate more informed decisions.

1

2

3

Final Concept

Ideate

THE LUCKY DUCK

53

A voiceof reason

A collectivememoryA scout

To land at a final concept we did research overview. The three concepts developed were promising, but at the core of our solution lies the need of our user, and after some digging the answer was clear. Tom experiences various ups and downs along the experience of moving, however, the need for information to evaluate his compatibility with a city is the most pertinent and most commonly experienced. Our concept needed to provide this value, without losing sight of the emotional layer that revolves the notions of leaving a home and starting up from scratch somewhere else.

Competitive Research

Ideate

FINDING OURSELVES

55

To understand ourselves as a brand, we had to look at our competitors. Our competitors offered services that were confusing, cluttered, and overwhelming. By understanding what others were doing well and not so well, we were able to outline attributes that represented what we were and were not.

YoungTransparentEmpowering

“Based on a biased point system and information is too general.”

TOP COMPETITORS

“Feels like a big list and is really overwhelming to navigate.”

“Playful approach to a serious topic and is very engaging.”

57

Prototype

Prototype

As we now understood the objective of our concept and branding, the time came to flesh out the specifics of it’s functions and move forward with getting user input. Beginning with sketches to flesh out ideas quickly to tedious graphic layouts, the move from low-fidelity to high-fidelity was a process based on user testing. Through a series of six iterations, our brand transformed before our eyes and a seamless service began to take shape.

57

Sketching and Sharing

Prototype

IDENTIFYING USER GOALS

59

The first stage in developing our concept was to get rid of excess. We identified how to fulfill the user need in the simplest form, and designed initial prototypes for basic interactions with the interface. Lo-fidelity prototypes were about adding softness to the hard data that we were dealing with, and figuring out what actions required from the user at each stage. Although we recognized that Tom is very mobile friendly, our service was developed for desktop use first because of the density of the information being considered. We also identified that our user is more likely to research about relocation at home or in the office, not on their phones in a rush. However, adapting the platform to a mobile version is a necessary next step, as the user will be likely to seek the information across different digital platforms.

Information Architecture

Prototype

DEVELOPMENT OF OUR STRUCTURE

61

Take me to “VOR”

Create account Sign in

“VOR”

Lifestyle Profile

Budget

Budget

MICRO DETAILS

MICRO DETAILS

MICRO DETAILS

MICRO DETAILS

MICRO DETAILS

Housing

Housing

Groceries

Groceries

Results Lifestyle by cities Compare lifestyles

Hobbies

Transportation

Transportation

City Search Search archive Advisor

ToolFeatures

Macro Catagories

Hobbies

Home

FINAL

Intro Video

City Saving Tips

RefinedCity Saving Tips

CUSTOMIZE LIFESTYLE

CUSTOMIZE LIFESTYLE

CUSTOMIZE LIFESTYLE

CUSTOMIZE LIFESTYLE

CUSTOMIZE LIFESTYLE

Housing

RefinedHousing

Food

RefinedFood

Results

Saved PlacesOverall Budget Compare Places

GENERAL CITY INFO

Entertainment

RefinedEntertainment

Transportation

RefinedTransportation

City Search

My Places

My Profile

Home

INITIAL

User Brand Interactions

Prototype

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF TOM

63

Alarm goes offShowers Checks notifications Wakes upChecks weather Gets dressed Gets coffee Reads the news Drives to work

Arrives at workListens to musicMakes conference call Goes to lunch Goes to meetingIndependent workChecks notifications Checks email

Gets drinks after work

Wraps up work

Watches football Gets home Heats up leftovers Watches TV Sets alarm Goes to bed

To better understand our brand, we looked at Tom’s day and the brands he interacted with. By examining the brands of our persona, we were able to gain a holistic view of our users lifestyle and the thing that they find appealing and expect from their products and services.

HousingC = 02%M = 12%Y = 86%K = 00%

BaseC = 76%M = 10%Y = 22%K = 00%

FoodC = 00%M = 48%Y = 100%K = 00%

TransportationC = 83%M = 19%Y = 53%K = 02%

Free TimeC = 24%M = 00%Y = 94%K = 00%

BudgetC = 04%M = 92%Y = 87%K = 00%

Branding

Prototype

CREATING VISUAL APPEAL

65

After defining our brand as empowering, transparent, and young it came time to understand it would look. The visuals of our branding needed to be playful to engage users, but still maintain the level of sophistication expected when dealing with a serious topic such as relocation. With a playful color scheme and a sans serif typeface (Roboto), we were able to better portray the quality desired.

RobotoThin

Thin Italic

Light

Light Italic

Regular

Italic

Medium

Medium Italic

Bold

Bold Italic

Bold

Black

Black Italic

TYPE TREATMENT COLOR SCHEME

ICONOGRAPHY

Search Save Share Sidebar Check Box Close Edit

Identity

Prototype

WE ARE LOCAL

67

We knew what we wanted to portray in our service, but what was going to be our name? After some time and thought, we decided on Local. Other top choices were Relo, Glimpse, and Pivot. Local portrays a service that begins the first steps towards understanding how your lifestyle will be like in a new context. Showing users nuggets on how they will interact with the city as a local.

COMBINATION MARKOur identity is a combination mark. We wanted a flexible symbol to represent moving and relocation, but we also wanted it to represent how the experience is specific to each individual. Our visual solution was to utilize a geo-pin to stand for relocation process and integrating the user within it.

The type treatment needed to convey a sense of welcoming. This lead us to use only lowercase letters. The typeface we selected was Aller for it’s stylized lowercase letter forms. We also lowered the ascenders on the l’s to create more visual consistency across the name.

User Testing

Prototype

BUILDING A PATH FOR ITERATION

69

With Low-fidelity prototypes we carried multiple rounds of testing and iterations. Our square layout allowed Kepler to alter the prototype easily. During initial rounds of testing we were looking at usability heuristics and as we moved into higher fidelities we were able to focus on concept. A key insight we observed was that users needed the option to change their preferences at any point of their journey with Local, and this is why a sidebar to alter functions was added to the interface. However, later feedback provided us with the insight that there was a lack of consistency between where information was being viewed and edited, which directly affected the user’s ability to achieve their goals.

User Testing

Prototype

BUILDING A PATH FOR ITERATION

71

Development

Prototype

SEARCH FOR A CITY

73

This welcomes the user into the experience, giving them a simple task prompted by a direct question: Where are you going? Users need information about places they are thinking of moving to, defining the place of interest is the first thing that needs to be covered in order to provide context specific information. By typing in the name of the city, like New York in Tom’s case, users are directly exposed to general information about the city.

Low-fidelity prototype on paper. First iteration of this function.

Digital wireframes to test Low-fidelity prototype.

Mid-fidelity prototypeof search function.

Mid-fidelity prototype. Users view this content

after they search .

Development

Prototype

ADJUSTING INFORMATION

75

A key characteristic of our tool. Local not only provides information, but it allows users to input details about their lifestyle and tweak them to see immediate changes in the way that city is being described. Users can adjust their details for housing, food, transportation, entertainment, and general life information. As a result they will get suggested neighborhoods, and information that fits how they go about life.

Low-fidelity prototype on paper. First iteration of this function.

Digital wireframes to test Low-fidelity prototype.

Mid-fidelity prototype before users input.

Mid-fidelity prototype with users input and suggested

neighborhood.

Digital wireframes to test Low-fidelity prototype.

Development

Prototype

COMPARE CITIES

77

Users not only need to view information about cities, but they need to be able to compare. Part of making a decision of where to move is rooted on comparing different cities and how you perceive how your lifestyle will be in each one. Local allows users to do so. After viewing recommended neighborhoods in a city users can save their place, and compare them side by side by scrolling through the different categories covered.

Mid-fidelity prototype showing saved cities.

Mid-fidelity prototype of cities compared side by side.

Low-fidelity prototype on paper. First iteration of this function.

High Fidelity

Prototype

SEARCH FOR A CITY

79

The final prototype of this function is a visually appealing screen where users are welcomed to search for a city. When they hit enter, a grid with information, labelled with icons, displays general characteristics of the city.

High Fidelity

Prototype

ADJUSTING INFORMATION

81

Users can click boxes from the general characteristics and personalize their housing, transportation, food, entertainment, and general lifestyle characteristics. The information on the grid and neighborhoods will then change to be in line with each user.

High Fidelity

Prototype

COMPARE CITIES

83

After users have personalized cities to fit into their lifestyle preferences, they can save neighborhoods of interest into “My places”. This build a collection of places that the user wants to compare in making their decision to move. Users select two places and compare side-by-side, navigating through the different categories.

85

Make moving easier.

Contact Information 87

Maria De La Vega

Phone Number: (912) 306 - 4709

Email: mariaadelavegaf@gmail.com

Personal Site: mariadelavega.com

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mdelavegaf

Kepler’s Contact Information

Xudan Zhou

Phone Number: (912) 306 - 9856

Email: danniezhou91@gmail.com

Personal Site: xudanzhou.com

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/xudanzhou

Andrew Wagenhals

Phone Number: (585) 755 - 8249

Email: awagenha@gmail.com

Personal Site: awagenha.com

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/awagenha

Lucia Cozzi

Phone Number: (305) 979 - 8300

Email: lucia.cozzi1@gmail.com

Personal Site: luciacozzi.carbonmade.com

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luciacozzi

Bibliography 89

Andromoney Service. AndroMoney Expense Track 2, 2014.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd-Xw230HDg.

Armstrong, Mike. Millennials Going the Distance for Jobs, @UrbanBound 2015, 2013.

Atkinson, Robert. Economic development in a global, innovation-based economy, International City/County Management Association, 2014.

Bernard, Tara Siegel. “Review: Apps to Track Income and Expenses.” The New York Times, January 3, 2014.

“Best Places to Live | Compare Cost of Living, Crime, Cities, Schools and More. Sperling’s BestPlaces.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://www.bestplaces.net/.

Bornstein, Marc H. Intergenerational Differences in Acculturation, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2011

Bruner, Jon. Migration in America: Vibrant Flux, Forbes.com LLC, 2011.

“Cat People or Dog People.” Accessed November 10, 2015. http://mysite.pratt.edu/~ywei/.

“Cost of Living.” Accessed November 10, 2015. http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/.

“DataParis.io - Une Dataviz Interactive Sur Paris et Les Parisiens.” DataParis.io. Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://dataparis.io.

Donovan, Anne. PwC’s NextGen: A global generational study, University of Southern California, 2013.

Elamawy, Shirien. What you need to know about relocation millennials, 2015.

Fondas, Nanette. Millennials Say They’ll Relocate for Work-Life Flexibility, Harvard Business, 2015.

Frey, William H. The Great American Migration Slowdown: Regional and Metropolitan Dimensions, Metropolitan Policy Program, 2009.

“Get Your Livability Score & Find The Best Places To Live - AreaVibes.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://www.areavibes.com/.

Howen, Neil. Are You Born To Be Better Off Than Your Parents? Forbes.com LLC, 2014

Howen, Neil. Revisiting The Homeland Generation. Forbes.com LLC, 2014

Lechene, Nicole Leah. Relocation Patterns Of Young Alumni, 2012

Lovewell-Tuck, Debbie. Lovewell’s Logic: The benefits of relocation. Centaur Media Plc. and licensor, 2015.

“Mint: Money, Bill Pay, Credit Score & Investing.” Drupal 7 (http://drupal.org). Accessed November 10, 2015.

https://www.mint.com/.

“Millennials Going the Distance for Jobs.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://www.urbanbound.com/millennials-go-the-distance.

Norris, Nathan. Why Generation Y is Causing the Great Migration of the 21st Century, PlaceMakers, 2012

“Olympic Story!” Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://www.olympicstory.com/.

“Online Registration Is Harder Than You Think -- Here’s What You Need to Know - Innovation Insights.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

Riemer, Jeffery W. Job relocation, sources of stress, and sense of home. Community, Work & Family, 2000.

Thompson, Derek. Generation Stuck: Why Don’t Young People Move, Anymore? 2012.

“Save Money, without Thinking about It - Digit.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

https://digit.co.

Service Design Heuristics, Usability Matters, 2015.

“10 Lessons You Learn Moving Away From Your Hometown.” Forever Twenty Somethings. Accessed November 10, 2015.

“100 Years of Rock Visualized.” Concert Hotels. Accessed November 10, 2015.

http://www.concerthotels.com/100-years-of-rock/.

“2014 National Movers Study | United Van Lines’ 38th Annual Movers Study.” Accessed November 10, 2015.

Bibliography