No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
ROLE OF ERGONOMICS IN STUDIES OF USABILITY AND USER EXPERIENCE
Abstract
Many concepts and methodologies exist today that are based on the idea that products and technical systems used in both work and everyday life need to satisfy a number of criteria if they are to be accepted and used under normal conditions. These new concepts, particularly those related to user experience, bring into question the role played by human factors and ergonomics in the design of products, as well as the contributions they can make. Also brought into question are the concepts and methods that are borrowed from other disciplines, and the development of methodological tools used. This paper aims to examine such issues, together with any developments.
... UX is a concept that refers to the quality of the user's experience in any interaction situation in digital environments. It describes the overall experience experienced by the user when using an interface, a digital device or any device or service [13]. Moreover, UX marks a disciplinary, methodological and conceptual evolution in the way of designing the user relationship to the products and considering their ergonomic quality. ...
... Moreover, UX marks a disciplinary, methodological and conceptual evolution in the way of designing the user relationship to the products and considering their ergonomic quality. This evolution takes into account the non-instrumental characteristics of products such as appearance, aesthetics, pleasure, emotion, etc. [13,14]. The aim is to consider all the characteristics and needs of users when developing products, and to involve them actively in the design process. ...
... It involves the emotional impact felt during the interaction, and even includes the anticipation of use. UX refers to the responses and perceptions of a person that result from the use or anticipation of the use of a product, service or system [13,14,15,16]. Figure 2 illustrates the different facets of UX. The User Interface (UI) is an important element for a high-performance product. ...
In recent years, gamification has emerged as a new approach to increasing learner engagement. It covers a very wide range of games with very different purposes and with many fields of application. However, most of the gamification solutions proposed do not adopt the same modeling approach and little attention has been paid to mobile serious games (MSG) belonging to different pedagogical contexts. In order to overcome these difficulties, we have developed in this paper a generic model based on the Software Product Line (SPL) approach to manage the common and variable points of the MSG product set. We have also focused on the User eXperience (UX) concept to study the aspects that most affect the player’s experience in the context of MSGs. These aspects have been modeled in the form of features in the SPL Feature Model. MSG designers can use the model proposed during the development process, both to manage variability and to create an effective and fun learning environment.
... According to a recent review conducted by [58], designing a system suited for end-users implies the system has good instrumental (usefulness, usability) and non-instrumental qualities (acceptability, hedonic quality, appealingness, immersion, presence), and generates a positive user experience. In the following section, these three factors based on ergonomic criteria were defined. ...
... Non-instrumental qualities have only recently been integrated into ergonomic analysis [58,69]. ...
The paper aims to offer a user-centred methodological framework to guide design and evaluation of applications combining Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) and Virtual Environment (VE). Our framework is based on the contributions of ergonomics to ensure these applications are well suited for end-users. It provides methods, criteria and metrics to perform the phases of the human-centred design process aiming to understand the context of use, specify the user needs and evaluate the solutions in order to define design choices. Several ergonomic methods (e.g., interviews, longitudinal studies, user based testing), objective metrics (e.g., task success, number of errors) and subjective metrics (e.g., mark assigned to an item) are suggested to define and measure the usefulness, usability, acceptability, hedonic qualities, appealingness, emotions related to user experience, immersion and presence to be respected. The benefits and contributions of our user centred framework for the ergonomic design of applications combining BCI and VE are discussed.
... Therefore, the temporality of the interaction between a user and a new technology must be considered (Alexandre et al., 2018;Distler et al., 2018). The concepts of acceptability, acceptance (Barcenilla & Bastien, 2009;Lee et al., 2003), and adoption (Rogers, 1962) all describe customers' attitudes towards various technologies. When looking at their detailed descriptions, it can be noted that they address different stages of technology maturity. ...
This paper conceptualizes how consumers perceive innovations at different stages
of technology maturity. The market and technology maturity model (MTMM) com- bines the constructs of acceptability, acceptance, and adoption with the widely used technology readiness level (TRL). The MTMM proposes that different aspects impact users’ attitudes and behavior at different stages of technology maturity. To demonstrate the effect of technology maturity on the acceptance factors, a review was conducted based on previous studies on the acceptance of new technologies at various stages of technological maturity. The findings demonstrate that performance expectancy remains stable across the TRL stages, but effort expectancy tends to gain importance only after TRL 7. This indicates that consumers do not consider effort when the technology is still in early development. The results show that the importance of technology acceptance constructs differs across the stages of technology maturity. A limitation of this study is that only the most commonly used factors influencing acceptance have been con- sidered. Future meta-studies should confirm the hypothesis with other factors such as social influence and hedonic motivation.
... Now, it is not a surprise to see that behavioral analysis can enhance ICT, organize more efficiently production tools, detect internal threats like targeted attacks, adapt softwares to the users, accelerate some repetitive tasks, etc. However, it goes with a certain acceptability from the users [5]. ...
This paper presents the use of machine learning algorithms to analyze the behaviors of users working in a distributed computer environment. The objective consists in discriminating groups of close users. These groups are composed of users with similar behaviors. Event related to the user's behaviors are recorded and transferred to a database. An approach is developed to determine the groups of the users. A non-parametric method of estimating a probability density is used to predict application launches and session openings in an individual way for each user. These algorithms have been implemented and demonstrated their effectiveness within a complete virtualization environment for workstations and applications under real conditions in a hospital.
There are a number of interrelating factors that must be considered and weighed against each other when deciding which features or capabilities should be added to a product to increase its flexibility and usability by a wider range of users. Not all strategies or approaches are created equal, and designers have limited resources in developing and improving products. It is, therefore, important that the different dimensions of usability be understood and that priorities be applied appropriately. This paper attempts to delineate some of the key dimensions of usability and to begin the process of providing a rationale for prioritization between possible changes to a product's interface. The paper discusses a multidimensional prioritization approach that is coupled to a vector-based usability evaluation procedure currently being developed.
Over the last decade, 'user experience' (UX) became a buzzword in the field of human – computer interaction (HCI) and interaction design. As technology matured, interactive products became not only more useful and usable, but also fashionable, fascinating things to desire. Driven by the impression that a narrow focus on interactive products as tools does not capture the variety and emerging aspects of technology use, practitioners and researchers alike, seem to readily embrace the notion of UX as a viable alternative to traditional HCI. And, indeed, the term promises change and a fresh look, without being too specific about its definite meaning. The present introduction to the special issue on 'Empirical studies of the user experience' attempts to give a provisional answer to the question of what is meant by 'the user experience'. It provides a cursory sketch of UX and how we think UX research will look like in the future. It is not so much meant as a forecast of the future, but as a proposal – a stimulus for further UX research.
Usability is presented as a concept which can limit the degree to which a user can realize the potential utility of a computer system. A field study is presented to illustrate the manner in which usability problems inhibit usage. The study examined a banking system which provided staff with 36 ways of extracting information from a customer's account. The usage log shows that four ‘codes’ accounted for 75% of usage and many codes’, although designed specifically for known banking tasks, were virtually unused. An investigation was undertaken in 15 branches to identify what happened when staff were confronted by tasks for which unused facilities had been designed. The results showed that staff were able to use a small set of well-known facilities for most purposes, albeit inefficiently and sometimes ineffectively. The strategy adopted was to avoid searching unknown facilities except as a last resort.From this and other field studies a framework is presented to summarize the variables affecting the usability of a system. It portrays the user making a series of implicit cost-benefit assessments as he undertakes tasks, attempting to minimize search effort ‘costs’ rather than trying to optimise ‘benefits’. The paper ends by examining the methodological implications of this framework. It is suggested that many of the variables which influence usability are excluded from normal experimental paradigms with the result that usability issues are often not evident in the results of experimental studies. It is advocated that more attention be paid to realistic simulation studies and to field experiments in order to submit the concept of usability to thorough scientific scrutiny.
This paper considers appropriate research methodologies for the development of Universal Usability. It is written from the viewpoint of research which has the long term objective of developing technological systems for everyone, including people with disabilities. It considers whether new research paradigms are appropriate and how they are different from those used within traditional technological research. It suggests the development of a new paradigm of "User Sensitive Inclusive Design" which includes people with disabilities within a User Centred Design methodology, and recommends a collaborative approach to the development of such a methodology.
The topic of emotion in computing is enjoying recent and growing attention. Such attention is problematic because, we argue, foregrounding emotion marks it as a subcomponent of interaction, which has the surprising consequence of reducing the importance of emotion’s function.
Emotion has come into vogue in reaction to the emphasis put on work, on efficiency and productivity in human computer interaction for so long. We discuss how this dichotomy is not in itself very fruitful in changing human-computer
interaction. We offer this article as a voice in an ongoing discussion about where we are heading, and which directions this
discussion could take.
Kansei Engineering was developed as a consumer-oriented technology for new product development. It is defined as “translating technology of a consumer's feeling and image for a product into design elements”. Kansei Engineering (KE) technology is classified into three types, KE Type I, II, and III. KE Type I is a category classification on the new product toward the design elements. Type II utilizes the current computer technologies such as Expert System, Neural Network Model and Genetic Algorithm. Type III is a model using a mathematical structure.Kansei Engineering has permeated Japanese industries, including automotive, electrical appliance, construction, clothing and so forth. The successful companies using Kansei Engineering benefited from good sales regarding the new consumer-oriented products.Relevance to industryKansei Engineering is utilized in the automotive, electrical appliance, construction, clothing and other industries. This paper provides help to potential product designers in these industries.
The present study examines the role of subjectively perceived ergonomic quality (e.g. simplicity, controllability) and hedonic quality (e.g. novelty, originality) of a software system in forming a judgement of appeal. A hypothesised research model is presented. The two main research question are: (1) Are ergonomic and hedonic quality subjectively different quality aspects that can be independently perceived by the users? and (2) Is the judgement of appeal formed by combining and weighting ergonomic and hedonic quality and which weights are assigned?The results suggest that both quality aspects can be independently perceived by users. Moreover, they almost equally contributed to the appeal of the tested software prototypes. A simple averaging model implies that both quality aspects will compensate each other.Limitations and practical implication of the results are discussed.
Valid measurement scales for predicting user acceptance of computers are in short supply. Most subjective measures used in practice are unvalidated, and their relationship to system usage is unknown. The present research develops and validates new scales for two specific variables, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, which are hypothesized to be fundamental determinants of user acceptance. Definitions for these two variables were used to develop scale items that were pretested for content validity and then tested for reliability and construct validity in two studies involving a total of 152 users and four application programs. The measures were refined and streamlined, resulting in two six-item scales with reliabilities of .98 for usefulness and .94 for ease of use. The scales exhibited high convergent, discriminant, and factorial validity. Perceived usefulness was significantly correlated with both self-reported current usage (r=.63, Study 1) and self-predicted future usage (r =.85, Study 2). Perceived ease of use was also significantly correlated with current usage (r=.45, Study 1) and future usage (r=.59, Study 2). In both studies, usefulness had a significantly greater correlation with usage behavior than did ease of use. Regression analyses suggest that perceived ease of use may actually be a causal antecedent to perceived usefulness, as opposed to a parallel, direct determinant of system usage. Implications are drawn for future research on user acceptance.
Appropriation is the process by which peopleadopt and adapt technologies, fitting them intotheir working practices. It is similar tocustomisation, but concerns the adoptionpatterns of technology and the transformationof practice at a deeper level. Understandingappropriation is a key problem for developinginteractive systems, since it critical to thesuccess of technology deployment. It is also animportant research issue, since appropriationlies at the intersection of workplace studiesand design.
Most accounts of appropriation in the researchliterature have taken a social perspective. Incontrast, this paper explores appropriation interms of the technical features that supportit. Drawing examples from applicationsdeveloped as part of a novel documentmanagement system, it develops an initial setof design principles for appropriabletechnologies. These principles are particularlyrelevant to component-based approaches tosystem design that blur the traditionalapplication boundaries.
Over the last 15 years, a comprehensive range of international standards has been developed to define the general principles of user-centred design and good practice in user interface design. Most of the standards specify general principles rather than the precise details of the interface. The paper briefly describes how standards are created and reviews the definitions of usability. HCI and usability standards are described in the categories: usability definitions, use in context, software interface and interaction, hardware interface, documentation, the development process and capability of the organization. The applicability of the standards is discussed.