Evaluating User Experience           AndUser Engagement for Design                      Jennefer Hart                     ...
Research Contribution  Extend (and Verify) User Experience Theories  Explore the Nature of Interactivity  Develop and T...
Research Aims & Objectives                               ➤  To Investigate Key Constructs Extend the Cognitive Models     ...
Research QuestionsRQ1: What are the key constructs that contribute     to user engagement and user experience?RQ2: What de...
Research Plan & Methodology STUDY 1                                    STUDY 2                   STUDY 3  Quasi-          ...
Research Plan (1)Study One: Quasi Experiment  Compare 3 different levels of interactive protocols     Aesthetics & Usabi...
The National Gallery – Menu-based Interaction
The Google Art Project – Virtual Interaction
The Louvre – Interactive Animated Guide
Research Plan (2)Study Two: Controlled Experiment  Compare 2-3 different levels of interactive protocols     Bespoke Tec...
Research Plan (3)Study Three: Longitudinal Study  Compare 2-3 different levels of interactive protocols     Existing tec...
Research Technologies: Personal Fitness Tools    Classic Text Based Style          Video Based Interaction StyleInteractiv...
Thank-you      any questions?
References  Hassenzahl, M. (2003) The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product. In M.Blythe, ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Evaluating User Experience and User Engagement for Design

2,857

Published on

Evaluating User Experience and User Engagement for Design by Jennefer Hart as presented at Manchester NUX

Published in: Design, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,857
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
81
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evaluating User Experience and User Engagement for Design

  1. 1. Evaluating User Experience AndUser Engagement for Design Jennefer Hart PhD Year OneSupervisors: Professor Alistair Sutcliffe & Dr Antonella De Angeli Manchester Business School July 2011
  2. 2. Research Contribution  Extend (and Verify) User Experience Theories  Explore the Nature of Interactivity  Develop and Test New Research Methodologies  Inform Design Practice  Improve Product Design
  3. 3. Research Aims & Objectives ➤  To Investigate Key Constructs Extend the Cognitive Models (e.g., Interaction, Immersion, Flow, within Presence, Aesthetics, Emotion & User Experience Individual Dispositions). Develop Research ➤  To Capture User Experiences (as Methodologies they occur). Explore Prolonged Patterns of ➤  To Capture UX Patterns (over a Interaction prolonged time frame) Inform ➤  To Inform Design Guidelines (by Design determining what interactive Guidelines features elicit positive UX)
  4. 4. Research QuestionsRQ1: What are the key constructs that contribute to user engagement and user experience?RQ2: What design protocols or features lead to positive user experiences?RQ3: What are the patterns of interaction over prolonged use?
  5. 5. Research Plan & Methodology STUDY 1 STUDY 2 STUDY 3 Quasi- Controlled LongitudinalExperiment Experiment Study Diary X-Section Test Adapted Applied Study Survey Method Survey Method Method METHODS METHODS Retrospect Interview Observation Interview
  6. 6. Research Plan (1)Study One: Quasi Experiment  Compare 3 different levels of interactive protocols   Aesthetics & Usability   Interaction & Engagement (Flow & Presence)   Individual Aesthetic Disposition  Develop Research Methodology   Survey Instrument   Observation – Critical Incidents   Interval Mood Scales (iScale*)   Video - Facial ExpressionRSQ 1: What are the key constructs that contribute to user experience? *[Karapanos, Martens & Hassenzahl, 2009]
  7. 7. The National Gallery – Menu-based Interaction
  8. 8. The Google Art Project – Virtual Interaction
  9. 9. The Louvre – Interactive Animated Guide
  10. 10. Research Plan (2)Study Two: Controlled Experiment  Compare 2-3 different levels of interactive protocols   Bespoke Technologies   Same Content V Different Interactive Features (e.g. video, presence, virtual, etc)  Research Methodology (from Study One)   Tested Survey Instrument   Observation – Critical Incidents   Interval Mood Scales (iScale)   Video – Facial Expression  Focus on Key Design Features   Interactive Guide (Presence)   Virtual Environment (Flow & Engagement) RSQ 2: What design ‘features’ lead to positive user experiences?
  11. 11. Research Plan (3)Study Three: Longitudinal Study  Compare 2-3 different levels of interactive protocols   Existing technologies (within same domain)  Prolonged Time Frame   Capturing patterns of prolonged user experiences  Adapted Research Methodology   Diary Based Study   Experience Probes   Adapted Mood Scales (iScale)   Two Phased Survey   Staged Interviews   Selected Observation RSQ 3: What are the patterns of interaction over prolonged use?
  12. 12. Research Technologies: Personal Fitness Tools Classic Text Based Style Video Based Interaction StyleInteractive Customization Facility Active (Haptic) Interactive Style
  13. 13. Thank-you any questions?
  14. 14. References  Hassenzahl, M. (2003) The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product. In M.Blythe, C. Overbeeke, A. F Monk, & P C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic . . Publishers, pp. 31-42.  Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002) Flow: The Classic Work on How to Achieve Happiness, London: Rider.  Hartmann, Sutcliffe, & De Angeli, (2008) Towards a Theory of User Judgement of Aesthetics and User Interface Quality. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 15(4), 15-30.  Hassenzahl, M. (2003) The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product. In M.Blythe, C. Overbeeke, A. F Monk, & P C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic . . Publishers, pp. 31-42.  Hassenzahl, M. (2004) The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products, Dordrecht, Human Computer Interaction (19) 4, 319-349.  Jordan, P W. (2002) Designing Pleasurable Products: An Introduction to the New Human Factors, CRC Press. .  Karapanos, E, Martens, J, B., & Hassenzahl, M. (2009) Reconstructing Experiences through Sketching, ACM TOCHI.  Law, E. L., Roto, V., Hassenzahl, M., Vermeeren, A. P O., & Kort, J. (2009) Understanding, scoping and defining user . experience: A survey approach, Proceedings: CHI 2009, Botson MA, pp. 710-728.  Leong, T. W., Vetere, F. & Howard, S. (2005) The Serendipity Shuffle Proceedings of the 19th conference of the computer- interaction special group (CHISIG), Citizens online: considerations for today and the future, OZCHI 2005, Canberra, Australia.  Nielson, J. (1993) Usability Engineering, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.  Norman, D. A. (2004) Emotional Design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things, New York: Basic Books.  Shen, K. N., & Khalifa, M. (2008) Exploring Multidimensional Conceptualizations of Social Presence in the Context of Online Communities, Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(7), 722-748.  Sutcliffe, (2010), Designing for User Engagement: Aesthetic and Attractive User Interfaces. Edited by Carroll, J.M, Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centred informatics, Morgan & Claypool Publishers, Chapter 1.  Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S. & Ikar, D. (2000) What is beautiful is usable, Interacting with Computers, 13 (2), 127-145.  Tractinscky and Zmiri, (2006) Exploring Attributes of Skins as Potential Antecedents of Emotion in HCI, In: Fishwick, P (ed.) Aesthetic Computing, MIT Press. Cambridge. ,  Wright, P & McCarthy, J. (2009) Experience-Centered Design: Designers, Users, and Communities in Dialogue, ., Synthesis Lecturers on Human-centered Informatics, Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×