This paper describes and gives an overview of User Experience (UX) professionals' work practices-their environment, practices, tools, and challenges. First, we reviewed 32 empirical studies about usability and UX work to identify key issues in usability and UX work practices. For the identified key issues, we collected data from 422 UX professionals surveyed in five different countries using a comprehensive questionnaire with 62 questions. Our results show that UX professionals individually know about usability and UX concepts, methods, and tools. They typically employ between one and five Human Computer Interaction (HCI) theories on average and use one to three different techniques and tools. On the organizational level, UX is involved from early to late stages and is generally well known within all levels of the organization. On the country and community level, UX professionals generally do not report themselves as belonging to a professional community, despite the fact that the survey was administered via channels of the respective communities in the survey countries. Overall, this survey shows that UX professionals have considerable work experience and strong UX expertise self-confidence. This may be considered as indicating a positive development of the UX profession.
The Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS) is a 55-item tool assessing nine constructs describing video game satisfaction. While the development of the GUESS followed best practices and resulted in a versatile, comprehensive tool for assessing video game user experience, responding to 55 items can be cumbersome in situations where repeated assessments are necessary. The aim of this research was to develop a shorter version of the scale for use in iterative game design, testing, and research. Two studies were conducted: the first one to create a configural model of the GUESS that was then truncated to an 18-item short scale to establish an initial level of validity and a second study with a new sample to demonstrate cross-sample validity of the 18-item GUESS scale. Results from a confirmatory factor analysis of the 18-item scale demonstrated excellent fit and construct validity to the original nine construct instrument. Use of the GUESS-18 is encouraged as a brief, practical, yet comprehensive measure of video game satisfaction for practitioners and researchers.
Digital technologies have changed human behavior, especially the characteristics of products and their functionalities related to interface and interaction. Smartphone users had to accept touchscreen interfaces without sufficient evidence of the effectiveness of these digital interfaces over physical analog interfaces. Moreover, smartphone gaming industries have introduced mobile games with touch-based interfaces that may or may not be effective for game users. This study aims to find empirical evidence for the effectiveness between analog and digital interfaces for smartphone game controls through two usability tests: (a) a pilot study to compare the data values between direct and indirect input control with six participants and (b) a main study to investigate the effects of tap-only afford between digital and analog input control from the results of the pilot study. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were used to analyze the usability test. A total of 81 participants were enrolled in the main study and divided into two large groups to compare one-handed and two-handed input controls. Nine participants in each group played smartphone games that were based on different input control tasks. This study found that direct touchscreen interaction was more effective for two-handed input control tasks and indirect physical input control was more effective for one-handed input control tasks.
We propose a novel cross-sequential approach to accelerating the collection of user feedback while providing a broad perspective by analyzing samples of users at various stages of service and product experience. User experience changes over time as the relationship between user and product evolves. Understanding temporal changes is important for designing positive long-term user experience and supporting customer loyalty. However, companies and researchers face time and cost constraints, which is why longitudinal studies tracking user experience over an extended period of time are extremely rare. The cross-sequential approach we propose reduces these barriers without compromising user-feedback quality. We tested the cross-sequential approach in evaluating the user experience of a commercial Internet security service and identified user experience spanning seven months in only seven weeks with two online surveys. We compared the cross-sequential approach to the cross-sectional approach commonly used in the industry. The cross-sectional approach identified differences between cohorts of 252 users. The cross-sequential approach, on the other hand, allowed us to identify changes in individual users' user experience. These changes could also be tracked to different usage phases. This information could guide the design of better long-term user experience for the service. The positive and negative changes in user enjoyment over time are relevant as they were reflected in users' loyalty to the service, replicating results from longitudinal studies. Thus, the cross-sequential approach can be especially useful when quick, cost-effective user feedback is needed regarding extended periods of using services or products.
We present a method for visualizing and analyzing card sorting data aiming to develop an in-depth and effective information architecture and navigation structure. One of the well-known clustering t...
We present a method for visualizing and analyzing card sorting data aiming to develop an in-depth and effective information architecture and navigation structure. One of the well-known clustering techniques for analyzing large data sets is with the k-means algorithm. However, that algorithm has yet to be widely applied to analyzing card sorting data sets to measure the similarity between cards and result displays using multidimensional scaling. The multidimensional scaling, which employs particle dynamics to the error function minimization, is a good candidate to be a computational engine for interactive card sorting data. In this paper, we apply the combination of a similarity matrix, a k-means algorithm, and multidimensional scaling to cluster and calculate an information architecture from card sorting data sets. We chose card sorting to improve an information architecture. The proposed algorithm handled the overlaps between cards in the card sorting data quite well and displayed the results in a basic layout showing all clusters and card coordinates. For outliers, the algorithm allows grouping of single cards to their closest core clusters. The algorithm handled outliers well choosing cards with the strongest similarities from the similarity matrix. We tested the clustering algorithm on real-world data sets and compared to other techniques. The results generated clear knowledge on relevant usability issues in visualizing information architecture. The identified usability issues point to a need for a more in-depth search of design solutions that are tailored for the targeted group of people who are struggling with complicated visualizing techniques. This study is for people who need support to easily visualize information architecture from data sets.
Smartwatches are quickly becoming a popular complement to smartphones for notifications and activity tracking, yet most lack an effective method for text input. Typing on a smartwatch with an onscr...
This paper presents the results of a study that aimed to compare the traditional concurrent think-aloud protocol with the co-participation method to determine the benefit of adding an additional participant to the testing session. The two methods were compared through an evaluation of a library website, and their relative validity and utility were measured using four points of comparison: overall task performance, test participants' experiences, quantity and quality of problems discovered, and the cost of employing each method. The results of the study show significant differences between the performances of the two types of testing methods. The co-participation method was evaluated more positively by users and led to the detection of a greater number of minor usability problems. This method, however, was found to require a greater investment of time and effort on the part of the evaluator in comparison to the classical method. This study found no difference between the methods in terms of task performance.
Since 1983, the term Wizard of Oz has come into common usage in the fields of Experimental Psychology, Human Factors, Ergonomics and Usability Engineering to describe a testing or iterative desig...
The current study was an investigation of the extent to which items constructed with an agreement format were affected by acquiescence bias relative to responses to a matched set of items designed ...
The number of ways consumers of health information access digital content has grown rapidly in recent years. People seek information using various hardware devices (e.g., computer, tablet, phone), ...
Understanding customer experience from a holistic perspective requires examination of user experience in the context of marketing and branding. This study attempts to underpin the effects of UX on ...
From humble beginnings, the SUS has become a valuable tool in the toolkits of usability and user experience practitioners and researchers. We have developed regression equations that compute benchmarks for SUS items based on an overall SUS score. A review of the SUS literature on published benchmarks for the means of overall SUS scores from usability studies/surveys provides guidance on selecting an appropriate value of SUS to use when setting item benchmarks. We expect this extension of SUS benchmarking methodology to be of value to usability and user experience practitioners.
Smartwatches are quickly becoming a popular complement to smartphones for notifications and activity tracking, yet most lack an effective method for text input. Typing on a smartwatch with an onscreen keyboard was originally thought to be impractical due to the small screen size. As a result, alternative keyboards that use "zoom" features to enlarge key size were developed as a potential solution. However, observed typing speeds with alternative keyboards are slow, and they often have a steep learning curve. Recent research, in a lab setting using a more familiar full QWERTY onscreen keyboard, demonstrated that it is possible to type quickly on a smartwatch while seated. Given the ubiquitous and mobile nature of smartwatches, this study examines typing performance using a full QWERTY keyboard while mobile. Participants typed using two different text input methods---trace and tap---with their index finger while standing and while walking. Results show participants typed faster with trace (35 words per minute) than tap (30 words per minute), regardless of whether they were standing or walking or whether they had prior experience with trace input. These typing speeds are among the fastest reported in the smartwatch literature. Typing accuracy was also better for trace than for tap and better when standing than while walking. Subjectively, participants rated trace easier to use, preferred it over tap, and suggested they would use it in the future if available. Recommendations to include a full QWERTY keyboard on all smartwatch designs are discussed.
Unchecked bias is one of the most significant threats to the user experience (UX) field today. In Bill Albert's (2015) article, "The Fox Guarding the Usability Lab," he claimed that bias stemming from a "conflict of interest," in which designers test their own designs, gets in the way of best practices and could irreparably stagnate the growth of this field over time. The issue of bias in modern user research and user-centered design could impact whether the field blossoms---as we know it should---or loses credibility among stakeholders. While we wholeheartedly agree that bias is challenging, solving this problem by ensuring that designers do not test their own designs is a nice goal but often unrealistic. Situations arise where teams are small, budgets are tight, and UX professionals have to be generalists who test their own designs. In those cases, teams must be thoughtful and take care to mitigate bias that when testing one's own design can introduce. Ideally, the solution to bias is creating a culture of self-reflection and mutual accountability.
People with Down syndrome (DS) often have trouble making healthy food choices. This article describes the user-centered design process of developing a smart phone app that could potentially help people with DS make better nutritional decisions when dining out at a restaurant. This work builds on multiple areas of HCI expertise, including user-centered design, interface accessibility for people with DS, and persuasive computing, as well as areas of medical and psychological expertise including nutrition. Two focus groups and three design workshops were held in 2016, involving 10 adults with DS and their caregivers. Based on the data collected, as well as feedback from a multi-disciplinary team of computer scientists, medical doctors, geneticists, neuropsychologists, and dietitians, a conceptual design was created that detailed key features and areas of concern. Implications for user-centered design, interface designers, and dietitians are presented in this article as well.
Mark Twain was undecided whether to be more amused or annoyed when a Journal representative informed him today of the report in New York that he was dying in poverty in London ... The great humorist, while not perhaps very robust, is in the best of health. He said: "I can understand perfectly how the report of my illness got about, I have even heard on good authority that I was dead. James Ross Clemens, a cousin of mine, was seriously ill two or three weeks ago in London, but is well now. The report of my illness grew out of his illness. The report of my death was an exaggeration." New York Journal, 6/2/1897
The current study was an investigation of the extent to which items constructed with an agreement format were affected by acquiescence bias relative to responses to a matched set of items designed with item-specific formats. If an acquiescence bias existed, the expectation was that the magnitude of responses to agreement items would be consistently greater than those to the matched item-specific versions. Two hundred respondents completed a survey in which they described and rated a recent interaction with an auto insurance website. Half of the respondents provided ratings using items with an agreement format (Version 1 of the survey), and the other half provided ratings on items matched for content but with item-specific endpoint anchors rather than generic disagree/agree endpoints (Version 2 of the survey). The two groups of respondents were matched on their ratings of overall experience, which was the same for both groups. Of 14 comparisons of matched agreement and item-specific formats, 12 (86%) were not statistically significant. For the other two items, the means of the agreement versions were significantly lower than those for the item-specific versions (p < 0.05), which is the opposite of the expected result if agreement items were affected by an acquiescence bias. Thus, despite published concerns about the potential effect of acquiescence bias on responses to items using an agreement format, the results of this study found no evidence for such bias, at least in the context of user experience research. Both agreement and item-specific formats appeared to work equally well.
Organizational usability is about the match between the user and the system, between the organization and the system, and between the environment and the system. While the first of these matches can, to a large extent, be evaluated in the lab, the two others cannot. Organizational usability must instead be evaluated in situ, that is, while the system is used for real work. We propose three contexts for such evaluation: pilot implementation, technochange, and design in use. Pilot implementation aims to inform the finalization of a system on the basis of testing it in the field prior to go-live. Technochange focuses on shaking down a system during go-live to realize the benefits it was developed to help achieve. Design in use is the tailoring performed by users after go-live to fit a system and its use to their local and emerging needs. For each evaluation context we describe its aim and scope, provide a brief example, and discuss the challenges it presents. To strengthen the focus on evaluation in the three contexts, we propose the measurement of specified effects, combined with a sensitivity toward emergent effects. Incorporating effects in the evaluation of organizational usability makes for working systematically toward realizing benefits from the use of a system.
The increasing prevalence of chronic heart failure requires new and more cost-efficient methods of chronic heart failure treatment. In the search for comprehensive and more cost-effective disease management, the use of self-monitoring devices has become increasingly popular. However, the usability of these wireless self-trackers needs to be evaluated if they are to be successfully implemented within a healthcare system. The aim of this study is to evaluate the usability of six self-tracking devices for use in telerehabilitation of heart failure patients. The devices were evaluated by 22 healthy volunteers who used them for 48 hours. Based on structured interviews, the volunteers rated the devices for their user-friendliness, design, comfort, and motivation. Also, the devices' step count precision was assessed using a treadmill walking test. Of the six devices subject to user tests, the Fitbit One, Fitbit Charge HR, Garmin Vivofit 2, and Beddit Sleep Tracker received significantly higher average scores than the Jawbone UP3 and Jawbone UP24, based on the structured interviews, p < 0.001. The Fitbit One and the Garmin Vivofit 2 received the lowest error percentage rates during the walking tests. The results indicate that in terms of overall usability for telerehabilitation purposes, the most suitable self-tracking devices would be the Fitbit One, Garmin Vivofit 2, and the Fitbit Charge HR.
