Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Are the Differences Between Good and Poor User Experience?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Intelligent Decision Technologies (IDT 2020)

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 193))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In the 2010s, concepts of both the human-centered design (HCD) and user experience (UX) have proved to be significant in providing efficient systems and services. Additionally, many methodologies to improve UX and usability are being proposed. However, UX is basically a complicated concept, and its design process requires not only engineering skills but also factors such as psychological knowledge, social understanding, and human-behavior consideration among others. To acquire the necessary abilities to realize a practical UX design, the differences between good UX and poor UX must be understood. In this study, a survey was conducted by collecting the opinions of university students. The questionnaire asked them to mention several examples of systems/services that provided good UX or poor UX. The results imply what types of services are liked and disliked by students. Therefore, this study would be informative for developers and designers who plan to provide their services for the young generation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://line.me/en/.

References

  1. ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html. Accessed 9 Mar 2020

  2. User-centered design, From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-centered_design. Accessed 9 Mar 2020

  3. Nacke, L. E., Mirza-Babaei, P., Drachen, A.: User experience (UX) researchin games. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland, UK (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3298826

  4. Alenljung, B., Lindblom, J., Andreasson, R., Ziemke, T.: User Experience in Social Human-Robot Interaction. Int. J. Ambient Comput. Intell. 8(2), 12–31 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJACI.2017040102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Marti, P., Iacono, I.: Anticipated, momentary, episodic, remembered: the manyfacets of user experience. In: Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, vol. 8, pp. 1647–1655. ACSIS (2016). ISSN 2300–5963. https://doi.org/10.15439/2016F302

  6. Vermeeren, A.P.O.S, Effie Law, E.L.C., Roto, V., Obrist, M., Jettie Hoonhout, J., Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K.: User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2010, Reykjavik, Iceland (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lachner, F., Naegelein, P., Kowalski, R., Spann, M., and Butz, A.: Quantified UX: towards a common organizational understanding of user experience. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2016, Gothenburg, Sweden (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2971501

  8. Hinderks, A., Schrepp, M., Mayo, F.J.D., Escalona, M.J., Thomaschewski, J.: Developing a UX KPI based on the user experience questionnaire. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 65, 38–44 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2019.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schrepp, M., Hinderks, A., Thomaschewski, J.: Construction of a benchmark for the user experience questionnaire (UEQ). Int. J. Interact. Multimed. Artif. Intell. 4(4), 40–44 (2017). https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2017.445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sari Kujala, S., Roto, V., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Karapanos, E., Sinnelä, A.: UX curve: a method for evaluating long-term user experience. Interact. Comput. 23, 473–483 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Linder, J., Arvola. M.: IPA of UX: interpretative phenomenological analysis in a user experience design practice. In: Proceedings of ECCE 2017—European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Umeå, Sweden (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3121283.3121299

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chuo University, Shinjuku-Ku, Tokyo, 162-8478, Japan

    Jun Iio

Authors
  1. Jun Iio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun Iio .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Gdynia Maritime University, Gdynia, Poland

    Ireneusz Czarnowski

  2. KES International Research, UK

    Robert J. Howlett

  3. Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, Centre for Artificial Intelligence, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Lakhmi C. Jain

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Iio, J. (2020). What Are the Differences Between Good and Poor User Experience?. In: Czarnowski, I., Howlett, R., Jain, L. (eds) Intelligent Decision Technologies. IDT 2020. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 193. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5925-9_38

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation