Frontend Developer · UI/UX

Mariia Badanina Frontend · UI · UX

Frontend developer with 6+ years of experience including 4.5 years in enterprise React environments, a Graphic Design degree, and a background built inside UX agencies. I bring both design literacy and technical depth — I understand why a design decision is made and exactly what it takes to ship it.

Based in
USA
Experience
6+ Yrs Experience
Available
May 2026
UX
MB
User Research
React / Vite
Wireframing
Accessibility
Figma

Frontend developer, UI/UX designer

I'm a frontend developer with a background in Graphic Design and hands-on experience building production React applications in a UX agency environment. My work has consistently sat at the intersection of design and engineering — translating Figma specifications into precise, accessible code, validating design systems, and collaborating daily with product designers.

"I know how designs get built. Now I'm focused on deepening the design thinking behind them."

I'm particularly interested in accessible and inclusive design — an area where my frontend background is a direct asset. I have implemented WCAG compliance, keyboard navigation, and cross-browser accessibility in production systems, and I approach it as a design discipline, not a checklist.

UX & Design
UX Concepts Wireframing User Flows Prototyping Desk Research Information Architecture
Accessibility & Inclusive Design
WCAG Guidelines Keyboard Navigation Screen Reader Testing Color Contrast
Frontend Engineering
React Vite TypeScript Three.js / R3F CSS / SASS Tailwind CSS
Design System & Tools
Figma Storybook D3.js React Query Git
Agency Experience
Secuoyas / Griddo IE Business School UX Agency Environment

Selected projects & case studies

Self-Guided Bilateral Regulation Tool — A UX Concept Exploration

⚠️
Concept Exploration — Not a Clinical Product This is a self-initiated UX design exploration. It is not clinically validated, not therapy, and not a replacement for professional mental health support. The project is presented as a design exercise demonstrating domain research, ethical reasoning, and safety-conscious UX decision-making.

This project is a self-initiated UX exploration of how bilateral stimulation patterns — inspired by Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) — could be translated into a safe, self-guided digital experience. EMDR is an evidence-based psychotherapy method recognized by the World Health Organization and the American Psychological Association for trauma treatment. It is traditionally conducted by licensed clinicians within structured protocols.

This project does not attempt to replicate or replace EMDR therapy. Instead, it explores a narrower question: How might UX design support emotional self-regulation, drawing on bilateral stimulation principles, while staying clearly within safe, non-clinical boundaries?

The product is positioned strictly as a regulation aid — not a therapeutic intervention. The design challenge was as much about what to exclude as what to include.

Accessibility was a first-order design principle

Three bilateral stimulation modes (visual, audio, haptic) ensure the tool works for users with visual impairments, hearing difficulties, or those in public settings. Color contrast, large tap targets, and calm visual hierarchy were considered throughout.

Project Type
Self-Initiated Concept Exploration
My Role
UX Designer (solo)
Platform
Mobile (iOS & Android concept)
Methods
Literature review · Protocol analysis · Competitive audit · Wireframing · User flow
Tools
Figma · FigJam · Pen & paper wireframes
Status
Concept — not built or clinically validated

Six stages from problem to impact

🔍
01
Problem
📚
02
Research
⚠️
03
Risk Analysis
✏️
04
Ideation
05
Solution
🔄
06
Reflection

The design challenge

While EMDR is clinically guided, many individuals seek accessible self-regulation tools between therapy sessions or during moments of emotional overwhelm. The question this project explores:

"How might we create a self-guided bilateral stimulation experience that prioritizes psychological safety and does not replicate trauma processing without clinical supervision?"

Access gap

Trained EMDR therapists are scarce and expensive. Many people cannot access structured support between sessions, when emotional regulation is most needed.

Existing tools ignore safety

Current wellness and meditation apps that touch on bilateral stimulation carry no safety architecture — no distress checks, no exits, no grounding. This can be destabilizing.

The ethical boundary

A digital tool cannot and should not attempt clinical therapy. The design challenge is defining exactly where self-regulation ends and therapy begins — then staying on the right side of that line.

Desk research & domain understanding

With no access to clinical participants, research was desk-based and focused on building domain knowledge and understanding the ethical boundaries of the space.

01

EMDR literature & protocol. Reviewed Francine Shapiro's foundational work and official EMDR protocol phases to understand the clinical structure this concept draws from — and must not replicate.

02

Bilateral stimulation mechanics. Studied how bilateral stimulation works — visual, auditory, tactile — and which patterns are used in regulated versus unregulated contexts.

03

Competitive audit. Reviewed existing mental health and meditation apps (Calm, Headspace, BrainTap) for safety patterns, user controls, and how they handle emotional risk.

04

Trauma-informed design principles. Studied emerging trauma-informed UX frameworks — predictability, user control, emotional off-ramps, soft visual hierarchy, safety before stimulation.

Designing within ethical constraints

Designing in a mental health context introduces high emotional and ethical risk. Before any wireframing, I mapped the constraints the design would need to respect.

Ethical boundary

No trauma memory activation

The original EMDR protocol asks users to hold a distressing memory in mind during stimulation. This tool deliberately removes all memory prompts — it targets regulation, not processing.

Clinical boundary

No clinical claims

All copy was written to avoid implying therapeutic benefit. The product is a regulation aid. Disclaimers are surfaced at onboarding and are not hideable.

Safety design

Built-in emotional exit points

A persistent "Stop & Ground" button appears at every stage of stimulation. It cannot be hidden or removed. This was a non-negotiable design constraint.

Closure

Mandatory grounding sequence

Every session ends with a grounding exercise that cannot be skipped. A session that ends abruptly without closure could leave a user in an activated state — this is not acceptable.

Design Principles Applied
Safety over stimulation
Predictability over novelty
User control over automation
Clear emotional off-ramps
Soft visual hierarchy
Closure before exit

The flow — simplified by design

Inspired by my wireframe sketches and the EMDR protocol structure, the final flow is deliberately simpler than clinical EMDR — removing everything that requires clinical supervision while preserving the safety architecture.

Phase A — Safety Check
Welcome & disclaimer
Distress check (≥8 → exit)
Safe place anchor
Phase B — Intention
Set a regulation intention
Choose BLS mode
Body awareness check-in
Phase C — Stimulation
BLS session (30s rounds)
Persistent stop button
Mid-session check
Phase D — Closure
Grounding exercise
Body scan (unskippable)
Check-out & note
Note: Phase B contains no memory activation prompts. Users set a regulation intention ("I want to feel calmer"), not a trauma target. This is the critical design departure from clinical EMDR.

Flow with decision branches & safety exits

Every path through the tool has a safe exit. The distress check gates entry; the Pause State allows exit at any point during stimulation.

START GATE Distress Check-in 1–10 <8 ≥8 Grounding only → SCREEN 2 Light Target Framing SCREEN 3 BLS Session Bilateral stimulation SCREEN 4 Pause State Resume / End Pause Resume End Session → SCREEN 5 Re-Rate Distress check SCREEN 6 Positive Cognition Reinforcement SCREEN 7 Grounding & Closure END SAFETY PREP PROCESS CLOSURE CLOSURE Safe path Safety exit Optional return

7 screens from initial sketches

Hand-drawn wireframes translated into structured lo-fi screens, covering the full session flow from check-in to grounding closure.

How are you feeling right now?

1
10
Continue

If you feel overwhelmed,
you can exit the session anytime.

Screen 1
Emotional State Check-In

Briefly describe what's bothering you

Skip
Next
Screen 2
Light Target Framing
02:30
Pause
Exit
Screen 3
Bilateral Regulation Session

Session Paused

Resume
End Session
Screen 4
Pause State

Let's check in again

I am safe now
I can handle this
I am strong
I am worthy of care
Screen 5
Re-Rate Distress

Choose your distress level

1
10
Continue
Screen 6
Positive Cognition Reinforcement

Let's take a moment to ground

Notice 3 things you see
Feel your feet on the ground
Take a slow breath
Screen 7
Grounding & Closure
About these screens

Lo-fi wireframes based on hand-drawn sketches. Focus is on layout, content hierarchy, and interaction patterns — not visual design. Grayscale palette intentional to defer aesthetic decisions.

What this exploration demonstrated

4
Safety checkpoints in every session
3
Accessible BLS modes — visual, audio, haptic
0
Clinical claims made anywhere in the product
100%
Sessions end with mandatory grounding closure

What this project taught me about UX judgment

The most valuable part of this project wasn't the wireframes — it was learning to reason about what a product should not do. Designing within high-stakes ethical constraints is a different discipline than designing for usability or aesthetics.

What worked well

  • Separating "regulation aid" from "therapy" as a framing gave every design decision a clear test: does this cross the line?
  • Removing memory activation prompts was the single most impactful safety decision — it redefined the entire product scope
  • The mandatory grounding closure turned a risk into a feature — users leave in a better state than they arrived
  • Desk research into trauma-informed design principles provided a ready-made ethical framework I didn't have to invent

Let's work together

I'm looking for frontend engineering roles with UX involvement, or structured UX programs. Available for full-time roles starting May 2026.

Open to opportunities
Available May 2026 · Open to frontend & UX roles
UX Design Analyst Design Engineer ReEntry Program UX Research Frontend Accessibility
📍 New York, NY · Authorized to work, no sponsorship needed
🎓 B.A. Graphic Design · Adalab Coding Bootcamp (Spain)