1. 9/4/2011
User Experience in Educational
Virtual Worlds
Panagiotis Zaharias, Marios Belk, Panagiotis Germanakos, George
Samaras
University of Cyprus
zaharias@cs.ucy.ac.cy
Main concepts
• User Experience (UX): holistic view on HCI
– Focuses on experiential, emotional and affective
aspects of interaction but also includes practical issues
such as traditional usability measures (Forlizzi and
Battarbee 2004),
– It is highly subjective and dynamic as it changes over
time (Hassenzahl and Tractinsky, 2006)
• Virtual Worlds: computer generated spaces
represented graphically in three dimensions and
can be experienced by many people at the same
time (Castronova, 2005)
Panagiotis Zaharias
EHCIDE 1

2. 9/4/2011
UX evaluation in Virtual Worlds
• Efforts on UX evaluation: B2C applications
(O’Briens, 2010; Petre et al., 2006) interactive products
(Karapanos et al., 2010; Hassenzahl, 2003) games
(Bernhaupt et al., 2008), etc.
• UX evaluation in VWs:
– Shin (2009) conducted an empirical study to examine
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational determinants for
the use of Second Life (SL)
– Wang and Mainwaring (2008) argue for the suitability
of ethnography in UX assessment in VWs
– Guna et al (2010) proposed a multimodal interaction
approach which significantly improved UX of SL users.
The study (1)
• Main goals: to investigate how UX in such a VW
develops over time
• Method:
– Participants: 40 students (57% male, 43% female, age
varying from 20-24) from the University of Cyprus
participated in a two-month problem-based learning
study
– To undertake the learning tasks and activities, a
learning space was built in Second Life where the
users had to use in-world collaboration tools and
techniques (i.e., text and voice chatting, forums for
comments, etc.)
Panagiotis Zaharias
EHCIDE 2

3. 9/4/2011
The study (2)
• Procedure:
– Phase I (during the first week): a series of introductory
tutorials on Second Life were conducted (i.e., how to
configure an avatar, how to create objects, etc.).
– Phase II: students formed groups of 3-4 and they were
assigned to design and develop interfaces for several
interactive systems (e.g., Realtor’s Agency, Online
Game Shop, University’s Management System, Smart
Home Management System, etc.) by utilizing objects
in VW
Panagiotis Zaharias
EHCIDE 3

4. 9/4/2011
The study (3)
• Data collection:
– AttakDiff2 questionnaire (Hassenzahl, 2004)
– Chat logs and observation
• Hassenzahl ‘s model of UX:
– Pragmatic Quality (PQ), (e.g. simple, practical,clear)
– Hedonic Quality Stimulation (HQS), (e.g. innovative,
exciting, new)
– Hedonic Quality Identification (HQI), (e.g. inclusive,
classy, presentable) and
– Attraction (ATT) (global appeal)
Results
• Two measurements at different times
(time0-end of week1 and time1-end of
week8):
– Evaluation measurements at time 0 were
higher than the evaluations at time 1
– Differences in evaluations of PQ were
significant (mean difference=.436, t=2.651,
p=.012)
• Usability problems such as navigation
problems and many technical problems
(service unavailability) led to users’
frustration and irritation
• PQ seems to affect the other UX qualities
• Despite the problems users felt that they
are using a novel system that supports
collaborative learning (ATT and HQS
higher than PQ and HQI)
Panagiotis Zaharias
EHCIDE 4

5. 9/4/2011
Limitations and Future work
• Use of AttrakDiff2
– Development of new methods for UX evaluation
customized to educational VWs
• The two measurements evaluated UX at two distinct
times (current state of UX)
– Future work can focus on how the perceptions of users
changed over time
• Use of methods such as event-contingent diaries (Bolger
et al., 2003) or tools like iScale (Karapanos et al., 2009)
– Reporting experiences retrospectively
– Focus on what a user remembers from an experience
Thank you!
Panagiotis Zaharias
EHCIDE 5