1

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

Beyond usability – Exploring User eXperienceof cross-platform Web services

Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-MattilaApril 1st, 2009

Contents of the presentation• Motivation and scope• User eXperience (UX) as a key design target• Service User eXperience (ServUX) factors• ServUX case studies

2

Motivation

• Cross-platform Internet services are enteringpeople’s everyday lives

• UX is often used as a synonym to usability –but is much more- In addition to the pragmatic features, hedonic

aspects of use – implying enjoyment and delight• Services differ from physical products

- Service experience is dynamic, social, contextual, …

Service UX scope• User experience of new Internet services (“Web 2.0”)

- Services in which the users’ active participation in creating theservices

- Media services where content is stored in the service andaccessed later

- Services may consist of ”mash-up” type of composite services- Cross-platform services, in which users access services via

mobile terminals, PC and public displays

• Examples:- www.amazon.com, www.facebook.com, www.ebay.com- Nokia Sports Tracker, Nokia Ovi, Nokia Image Space- Future: Mobile Mixed Reality services, ubiquitous services

3

Aim of this research• This research aims at developing

- In-depth understanding of Service User eXperience(ServUX) factors and

- A set of evaluation methods and design guidelinesfor SUX

Practical goals:• To help designing enticing cross-platform Web

services with excellent UX• To develop practical methods for the agile service

design and evaluation process

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

User eXperience (UX) as adesign target

4

Usability (ISO9241-11)• The extent to which a product can be used by specified

users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness,efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.

• Usability is about:- Effectiveness - can users complete tasks, achieve goals with the

product, i.e. do what they want to do?- Efficiency - how much effort do users require to do this? (Often

measured in time or number of steps/actions)- Satisfaction – how satisfied are the users about the product?

• ….which are affected by:- The users - who is using the product? e.g. are they highly trained and

experienced users, or novices, or occasional users?- Their goals - what are the users trying to do with the product - does it

support what they want to do with it?- The usage situation (or 'context of use') – e.g. where and how is the

product being used?

People seek pleasurable experiences

Hierarchy ofConsumer needs

Jordan, P (2002): DesigningPleasurable Products,Taylor and Francis.

Functionality

Usability

Pleasure

Jordan’s four pleasures framework(based on Tiger 1992):

Physio-pleasure• Pleasure from sensory

organs, e.g. tactile feedback

Socio-pleasure• Enjoyment from socialinteractions

Psycho-pleasure• Cognitive and emotionalresponses, e.g. usability

Ideo-pleasure• Supporting people’s values,

e.g. green values

5

Hassenzahl & Tractinsky (2006)

Hassenzahl & Tractinsky (2006): User Experience – a Research Agenda. Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol.25, No. 2.

Figure according to Roto, V: Web Browsing on Mobile Phones – Characteristics of User Experience, Dissertation in TKK, December 2006.Hassenzahl (2002), The effect of perceived hedonic quality of product appealingness, Int., Journal of Human-Computer

Interaction, 13 (4), 479-497.

“A consequence of a user’s internal state (predispositions, expectations,needs, motivation, mood, etc.), the characteristics of the designedsystem (e.g. complexity, purpose, usability, functionality, etc.) and thecontext (or the environment) within which the interaction occurs (e.g.organisational/social setting, meaningfulness of the activity,voluntariness of use, etc.).”

Situation(Context)

Hassenzahl’s UX model

Apparent product characters

Pragmatic attributesManipulation, functionality, usability

Hedonic attributesStimulation

IdentificationEvocation

Consequences

Appeal

Pleasure

Satisfaction

Hassenzahl, M.: The thing and I: Understanding the relationship between usersand product (Chapter 3 in: Funology, from Usability to Enjoyment, 2007, pp. 31-42)

• UX is “a consequence of a user’s internal state, the characteristics of thedesigned system, and the context (or the environment) within which theinteraction occurs.” (Hassenzahl & Tractinsky 2006)

6

Product characteristics [Hassenzahl]

PragmaticGoal-achievementManipulationUtilityUsability

Hedonic - stimulationPersonal development- Increasing knowledge- Increasing skillsCuriosity; new impressions,opportunities and insightsFuture opportunities for personaldevelopment- Novel, interesting and excitingfunctionality, content,presentation or interaction style…

Hedonic - identificationSelf expression- Show myself sociallyin a way that I want(communicate identity,be socially recognized)Excert power overothers…

Hedonic - evocationProvoke memories- Past events,relationships or importantthoughtsSymbolic value…

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

ServUX factors

Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Väätäjä, H. and Vainio, T. (2008).Opportunities and Challenges of Designing the Service User eXperience (SUX) in Web 2.0.Accepted to Saariluoma, P. and Isomäki, H. (Eds.), Future Interaction Design II, Springer.

7

Service UX factors: The big picture

Service ecosystem

Service

User/developercommunities

Contents +metadata

Contents +metadata

Service

Servicecomposites

Service User Interface+ context

Multiple platforms/device UIs

Service UX factors• Usage and creation of composite services

- Service components come from various sources in the service ecosystem- Users create ”mash-ups” for their personalised experiences

• Cross-platform service interaction- Multiple interaction styles on cross-platform UIs- Tasks are distributed between platforms

• Social interaction and navigation- Direct interaction between users (synchronous and asynchronous)- Users can navigate in the service by following each others’ activities

• Dynamic service features- Temporally changing service contents, UI and functionality- Informing users about the changes

• Context-aware services and contextually enriched content- Service adapts to the usage context- Contextual metadata can be added to enrich the contents

• Privacy, personalisation, aesthetics, usability, …

Service ecosystem

Service

User/developer communities

ContentsContents

Service

Servicecomposites

Service User Interface

Multiple deviceplatforms (UIs)

8

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

Service UX case studies1. Service UX expert evaluations of three Web services2. Mobile Journalism UX field study3. Mobile Mixed Reality user needs focus group study4. Nokia Image Space concept & field study

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

Service UX expert evaluations

9

Motivation & research process• Gain in-depth understanding of the service UX factors

- Develope evaluation heuristics for service UX• Expert evaluation of three Web services

- Facebook- Nokia Sports Tracker- TripAdvisor

• Three evaluators per service• Both PC and mobile usage• Two days evaluation time over 1-2 weeks• Using an initial set of SUX heuristics

Table 1. The initial set of service UX heuristics

Findings outside H1-H6H7

All Web servicesThe service UI should be usable andaesthetically pleasing, support users’trust and privacy, and other UXaspects.

General UX-related issuesH6

Services in which part of theservice is related to themobile context

The service adapts to the user’s context ofuse and offers meaningful contextualinformation.

Context-aware servicesand contextuallyenriched content

H5

Services with dynamiccontents and UIs

Users can perceive the changes in theservice contents or user interface (UI).

Dynamic service featuresH4

Services that enable users tocommunicate with eachother or see what otherusers have done with theservice

Users can interact with their relevant usercommunities, and utilize other users’navigation histories in their interactionwith the service.

Social interaction andnavigation

H3

All Web servicesUsers can access the relevant serviceelements they need on their PCs andmobile terminals.

Cross-platform serviceaccess

H2

Services that can be extendedby the developers orusers “online”

Users can add new service components(“Mash-ups”) offered to them throughthe service, or even create their ownservice components or applications.

Usage and creation ofcomposite services

H1

ApplicabilityDescriptionName of the heuristic

10

For example, H4 (Dynamic service features)listed the following aspects:• Pragmatic aspects of the heuristic:

- When users enter the service, it is possible to gain anoverview of the recent changes in the service

- While using the service users can easily find the new,interesting content

• Hedonic aspects of the heuristic:- The service feels like a lively place where it is

enjoyable to spend time- The service satisfies users’ curiosity/seeking of

knowledge by frequently offering interesting content

New kind of UX evaluation method for agileservice development process[To appear in CHI’09 work-in-progress paper]

Table 2. Examples of UX findings from expert evaluations. FB = Facebook, TA = Trip Advisor, ST = Nokia Sports Tracker.

“It is not clear who sees the comments I write to others” (FB, H3)“The user is reminded too often that his/her browser is unsupported” (TA, H6)

-H

“Changing of profile pictures is fun, and allows the user to present various sides oftheir identity to friends” (FB, H3)“It is exciting to try to improve one’s training when friends can see the workout live”(ST, H4)

+H

“It is really confusing when the application UI changes” (FB, H4)“User cannot access the associated media items from the mobile UI” (ST, H2)

-P

“Adding new applications is really easy” (FB, H1)“It is easy for the user to see the current location in the service as the tabs andoptions below them are clear” (TA, H6)

+P

Example findings+/-P/H

11

ResultsBased on experts’ 255 findings + affinity diagram analysis

• Central pragmatic UX themes:- Service usability- Cross-platform UI consistency- Suitability of functionality- Technical issues such as GPS reliability

• Central hedonic UX themes:- Social presence, especially showing achievements and

presence information- Trust, especially privacy- Being informed about the changes in the service- Creating and consuming content

Results: Updated SUX evaluation heuristics[Submitted to Interact 2008]

New heuristic: Service and its contents should suit users’ tasksand support goal achievement.

Service and content suitabilityuH9

New heuristic: Specific technical issues such as positioningaccuracy, browser compatibility, network connection, etc.

Technical issues affecting UXuH8

New heuristic: Dedicated heuristic for issues that affect users’feeling of safety and trust towards a service: Privacy, cost-awareness, respectful feedback and contents, and unobtrusivepresentation of advertisements.

Trust and safetyuH7

Dedicated usability heuristic, divided into subtopics e.g.according to Nielsen [13]: User’s language, consistency,navigation, user control and error prevention.

Service usabilityuH6

No major changes. (Needs to be reviewed when there is moredata of its use.)

Contextual aspects of the serviceuH5

No major changes in contents, but will explicitly mention the term“change” as well as the upgrading of new service versions.

Changing aspects of the serviceuH4

No major changes in content, but will be divided into furthersubthemes, e.g. according to [10].

Social interaction and navigationuH3

No major changes.Cross-platform service interactionuH2

Added the issue of “easy linkages between related services”.Composite and linked servicesuH1

Explanation in relation to the initial set of heuristicsNameUpdatedheuristic

12

SUX questionnaire for iterative service development[An excerpt]

Cross-platform service usageI can do all the things I wanted with the service on my mobile deviceI can do all the things I wanted with the service on the PC

Social interaction and navigationI enjoy creating my own content in the serviceI enjoy the comments from others to my contentI enjoy the content created by othersI can communicate (meet online) with other users of this service

Dynamic service characteristicsWhile using the service I can easily find the new content that is interesting to meThe changes in the functionality of the service are positive to meThe service feels like a lively place where it is enjoyable to spend my time

Context-aware service and contextual contentThe additional information (e.g. location, time, season) associated to the content is very

interestingThe service offers me the right content in different situations

Trust, privacyMy personal information is fully secure in the serviceThe service is available when I need it

Aesthetics, personalization, stimulation, …

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

Mobile Mixed Realityuser needs focus group study

• In cooperation with NRCPart of a Tivit-funded project ”Devices and

Interoperability EcosysteM (DIEM)”

Contact: Thomas Olsson, thomas.olsson@tut.fi

13

Goals & methodology of the MMR user needs study• Goals of the study:

- To find out potential users’ expectations of future Mobile MixedReality (MMR) services

• Potential use cases• Expectations about UX with the system• Perceived benefits and drawbacks

- To find out what kind of content users would value in MMR

• Focus group sessions were conducted with 5 differenttypes of user groups (n = 23)- Travelers/tourists (6 persons)- Senior high school students (4 persons)- Technologically-oriented students (4 persons)- Wellness-oriented people (5 persons)- Ecologically-oriented people (4 persons)

Real view

14

Personal augmentedview

MovierestaurantDay’s special:

Illinois Burger 5 e

See Menu

Statue

“To the sea”1985

PAAVILAINEN ja PerttiMÄKINEN: Pronssia /

navigaatio-monumentti

Read more

Cinema 1Rio

Cinema 2Plaza

Cinema 3Kino

Plaza

Next showing:

Hellboy II: The Golden

Army 14.30 (Plaza 8)

Kung Fu Panda 14.45

(Plaza 4)

Tropic Thunder 15.00

(Plaza 9)

Further alternatives

15

Example narrative:An ordinary day

• Juhani and Maria wake up early in the morning. When Juhani is awake, he points his phone tothe bed room wall to see the local news and weather. Maria feels unwell and continues hersleep. Juhani promises to get Maria some medicine for the cold and leaves for work in a hurry.While Juhani is walking towards the buss stop, his cell phone recognizes the route and makes aguess that Juhani is going to the bus stop. The cell phone automatically informs Juhani about thebuses that are most suitable for him. While he waits, Juhani points his cell phone to the digitalinfo screen and researches other possible bus choices. In addition, he browses bus journeyrelated experiences shared by other travelers. Juhani steps into a bus and touches a digital infospot with his phone. This way he pays for his journey and also gets the bus company’s BusNews-bulletin and services provided in that bus. These services include music lists created by othertravelers and different kinds of mobile games. Juhani activates an info sticker on the backsideof the seat in front of him and this opens the BusNews bulletin contents list on his cell phonescreen. The icons and texts on the sticker become downright alive when Juhani browses theinformation content in the sticker with his cell phone. Suddenly Juhani is alerted by his phonethat it’s time to step out of the bus, and gives quick feedback about the bus trip.

• Juhani arrives at his work place. The first thing Juhani does is to point his cell phone to theinteractive wall of his office and looks at his calendar. He takes a video call to Maria, to see howshe is. At the same go, he sends a movie to Maria to brighten her day. They decide that Juhanigets the medicine on his lunch break and picks up accessory tips of the week from H&M. WhenJuhani arrives at a pharmacy, he scans medication choices to his cell phone display. The phonecompares the medicines and gives Juhani tips. When he arrives at H&M’s, he goes to a counterand gets special glasses from there. With the glasses Juhani sees tailored adverts on new boxershort sets based on his consumer data. When looked at with the glasses on, the empty catwalkon the back of the shop is busy with models presenting fresh winds in the mode. Juhani pointshis phone to the catwalk and downloads the accessory tips of the week and sends them straightto Maria. At home Maria projects garments to the wall and creates outfits by changingcollections by swinging her wrist.

….. continues…

Results (sample of)1) User expectations questionnaire

2) Qualitative discussion results

16

Expectations questionnaire

I believe that mixing reality and virtual realityin mobile services… … would bring added

value to mobileservices.

…would increase myknowledge concerningenvironment.

…would addcontrollability ofmobile devices.

…would help me to reach myaims via mobileservices.

5 = totally agree4 = mostly agree3 = neither agree nor disagree2 = mostly disagree1 = totally disagree

These diagrams are made based on the data collected with the questionnaire (inthe end of the sessions). The questions are translated from Finnish to English.

avg 4,4stdev 0,6

avg 4,0stdev 0,6

avg 3,0stdev 0,9

avg 3,7stdev 1,1

I believe that mixing reality and virtual reality in mobile services…

… would demand much of resourcesconcerning informationprocessing, for instanceattention and learningabilities.

… would increase the attractionof the mobile services.

… I could trust the validity ofinformation I havereceived.

I believe that, if services mentioned inthis focus group interview would

exist, I would use them often.

…would stimulate me and wouldawake memories andemotions, would cheer meup and would unwind me.

…would bring liveliness andconstantly morecontent to mobileservices.

avg 4,2stdev 0,7 avg 3,7

stdev 0,9

avg 3,8stdev 1,0

avg 4,0stdev 0,7

avg 3,5stdev 1,0

avg 2,8stdev 1,0

Expectations questionnaire

17

Sample results: User needs of MMR (1/2)

• In general, participants found MMR an interesting- MMR features were seen to bring added value and liveliness to

mobile services and increase one’s knowledge aboutsurroundings

- Information that can not be otherwise acquired would be especiallyuseful in unfamiliar contexts but MMR would also provide rich infoabout familiar contexts

• Participants seemed to value the practical benefits overfun (e.g. searching for information related to transportation,products and places)

• Reliability of information was seen similar as in Internet:info provided by public institutions and authorities was moretrusted than that provided by other users- However, the relevance and interest is often higher in user-

generated content

Sample results: User needs of MMR (2/2)

• The service should be highly personalizable so that theinformation is relevant for the user- E.g. information that was useful for other like-minded people or

other members in one’s communities- Also personalized advertisements were regarded as useful as

long as they are relevant and provide features for comparingproducts and easily buying them

- The service having a up-to-date or adaptive model of the user,which would support context awareness

- The user could set modes, by which the amount of info andinteraction would be determined

• Potential users were willing to contribute to theinformation – e.g. by comments and ratings – and shareinfo about their own status and whereabouts

• Information flood and personal privacy violations wereseen as the biggest threats concerning MMR

18

http://www.cs.tut.fi/ihte

Thanks!Questions, comments, ideas?

kaisa.vaananen-vainio-mattila@tut.fikaisa.vaananen-vainio-mattila@nokia.com