Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mixed prototypes for the evaluation of usability and user experience: simulating an interactive electronic device

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Virtual Reality Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 30 July 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

Mixed prototyping technology can be used to represent and simulate the behavior of interactive products at low cost and with great flexibility. This preliminary experimental research intends to verify the suitability of using this technology in the evaluation of usability and user experience of interactive products. Users and experts evaluate the mixed prototype of an image projector with regard to its own usability, and also with respect to its ability to be used to evaluate usability and user experience aspects of the real projector. Users perform tasks on both the real projector and its mixed prototype. In regard to these comparative performance evaluations, time to perform the task and number of errors show a clear positive relationship with the difficulty of the task for both mixed prototype and real projector. In regard to more subjective UX evaluations, the results show to be congruent. However, we realize that emotions assigned to the mixed prototype are influenced by the “fascination” that augmented reality arises in individuals. Experts evaluate the mixed prototype with respect to aspects of the interaction with the product that it is able to simulate, and with respect to the classes of products best suited to be prototyped. They highlighted the possibility of using the technology to evaluate product performance, ergonomics, and operation. In regard to the classes of products to be prototyped, experts’ suggestions coincided with the classes of products that have already been used in research: household appliances, information and communication devices, and automotive parts and accessories.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

(Adapted from Bangor et al. 2009)

Fig. 9
Fig. 10

(Reproduce with permission from Jordan 2002)

Fig. 11

(Reproduce with permission from Caicedo and Desmet 2009)

Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 30 July 2018

    In the original publication of the article, the following corrections have to be noted down.

References

  • Aoyama H, Kimishima Y (2009) Mixed reality system for evaluating designability and operability of information appliances. Int J Interact Des Manuf 3(3):157–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangor A, Kortum P, Miller J (2009) Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J Usab Stud 4(3):114–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri L, Angilica A, Bruno F (2013) Mixed prototyping with configurable physical archetype for usability evaluation of product interfaces. Comput Ind 64(3):310–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordegoni M, Caruso G (2012) Mixed reality distributed platform for collaborative design review of automotive interiors. Virtual Phys Prototyp 7(4):243–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordegoni M, Cugini U, Caruso G, Polistina S (2009) Mixed prototyping for product assessment: a reference framework. Int J Interact Des Manuf 3(3):177–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordegoni M, Ferrise F, Covarrubias M, Antolini M (2011) Geodesic spline interface for haptic curve rendering. IEEE Trans Haptics 4(2):111–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooke J (1996) SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usab Eval Ind 189(194):4–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno F, Angilica A, Cosco F, Muzzupappa M (2013) Reliable behaviour simulation of product interface in mixed reality. Eng Comput 29(3):375–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caicedo DG, Desmet PM (2009) Designing the new PrEmo: an empirical research on how to improve the emotion measuring tool. Delf University of Technology, Delf

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi YM (2015) Utilizing end user input in early product development. Procedia Manuf 3:2244–2250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmet PM (2003) Measuring emotions: development and application of an instrument to measure emotional responses to products. In: Blythe MA, Overbeeke K, Monk AF, Wright PC (eds) Funology: from usability to enjoyment. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–124

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Faust FG, Roepke G, Catecati T, Araujo F, Gomes Ferreira MG, Albertazzi D (2012) Use of augmented reality in the usability evaluation of products. Work (Reading, Mass.) 41(1):1164–1167

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrise F, Bordegoni M, Graziosi S (2013) A method for designing users’ experience with industrial products based on a multimodal environment and mixed prototypes. Comput Aided Des Appl 10(3):461–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrise F, Graziosi S, Bordegoni M (2015) Prototyping strategies for multisensory product experience engineering. J Intell Manuf 28(7):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Jo DS, Yang UY, Son WH (2008) Design evaluation system with visualization and interaction of mobile devices based on virtual reality prototypes. ETRI J 30(6):757–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan PW (2002) The personalities of products. In: Green WS, Jordan PW (eds) Pleasure with products: beyond usability. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 17–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Landa J, Procházka D (2013) Usage of Microsoft Kinect for augmented prototyping speed-up. Acta Univ Agric Silvicult Mendel Brun 60(2):175–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurans G, Desmet P (2012) Indroducing PREMO2: new directions for the non-verbal measurement of emotion in design. Central Saint Martins College Of Arts & Design, London, p 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee JY, Rhee GW, Park H (2009) AR/RP-based tangible interactions for collaborative design evaluation of digital products. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 45(7–8):649–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee YG, Park H, Woo W, Ryu J, Kim HK, Baik SW et al (2010) Immersive modeling system (IMMS) for personal electronic products using a multi-modal interface. CAD 42(5):387–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu SY, Shpitalni M, Gadh R (1999) Virtual and augmented reality technologies for product realization. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 48(2):471–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oikawa MA, de Souza Almeida I, Taketomi T, Yamamoto G, Miyazaki J, Kato H (2012) Augmented prototyping of 3D rigid curved surfaces. In: Mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), 2012 IEEE international symposium on mixed reality 2012, pp 307–308

  • Park H, Moon HC (2013) Design evaluation of information appliances using augmented reality-based tangible interaction. Comput Ind 64(7):854–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park H, Son JS, Lee KH (2008) Design evaluation of digital consumer products using virtual reality-based functional behaviour simulation. J Eng Des 19(4):359–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park H, Moon HC, Lee J (2009) Tangible augmented prototyping of digital handheld products. Comput Ind J 60(2):114–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park H, Park SJ, Jung HK (2013) Note on tangible interaction using paper models for ar-based design evaluation. J Adv Mech Des Syst Manuf 7(5):827–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park H, Jung H-K, Park SJ (2014) Tangible AR interaction based on fingertip touch using small-sized nonsquare markers. J Comput Des Eng 1(4):289–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Park M, Lim K, Kook Seo M, Jon S (2015) Spatial augmented reality for product appearance design evaluation. J Comput Des Eng 2:38–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Regenbrecht HT, Wagner M, Baratoff G (2002) Magicmeeting: a collaborative tangible augmented reality system. Virtual Real 6(3):151–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin J, Chisnell D (2008) Handbook of usability testing: How to plan, design, and conduct effective tests, 2nd edn. Wiley, Indianapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi H, Kawashima T (2010) Touch-sensitive augmented reality system for development of handheld information appliances. Int J Interact Des Manuf 4(1):25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tullis T, Albert B (2013) Measuring the user experience: collecting, analysing, and presenting usability matrics. MK Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger R, Chandler C (2009) A project guide to UX design: for user experience designers in the field or in the making. New Riders, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Verlinden J, Horvath I (2010) The enablers for interactive augmented prototyping. Int J Prod Dev 1(1):62–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verlinden J, Horváth I (2008) Enabling interactive augmented prototyping by a portable hardware and a plug-in-based software architecture. Strojniski Vestnik J Mech Eng 54(6):458–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Verlinden J, Horváth I (2009) Analyzing opportunities for using interactive augmented prototyping in design practice. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 23:289–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verlinden JC, de Smit A, Peeters AW (2003) Development of a flexible augmented prototyping system. J WSCG 11(3):496–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Verlinden J, Horváth I, Edelenbos E (2006). Treatise of technologies for interactive augmented prototyping. In: Proceedings of tools and methods of competitive engineering (TMCE), pp 523–536

  • Verlinden J, Horváth I, Nam TJ (2009) Recording augmented reality experiences to capture design reviews. Int J Interact Des Manuf (IJIDeM) 3(3):189–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viganò G, Mottura S, Greci L, Sacco M, Boër CR (2004) Virtual reality as a support tool in the shoe life cycle. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 17(7):653–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank CNPq, CAPES, and FAPESC (Brazilian government agencies for scientific and technological development) for the financial support that makes this research possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Engenharia de Produção e Sistemas, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Campus Trindade, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil

    Fernanda Gomes Faust & Tiago Catecati

  2. Departamento de Design, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Av. Buriti, 680, ap. 705B, Itacorubi, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, CEP 88.034-500, Brazil

    Isabella de Souza Sierra, Fernanda Steinbruch Araujo, Elton Moura Nickel & Marcelo Gitirana Gomes Ferreira

  3. Departamento de Computação Aplicada, Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Campus Itajaí, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil

    Alejandro Rafael García Ramírez

Authors
  1. Fernanda Gomes Faust
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tiago Catecati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabella de Souza Sierra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fernanda Steinbruch Araujo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alejandro Rafael García Ramírez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Elton Moura Nickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Marcelo Gitirana Gomes Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcelo Gitirana Gomes Ferreira.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 36 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 519 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faust, F.G., Catecati, T., de Souza Sierra, I. et al. Mixed prototypes for the evaluation of usability and user experience: simulating an interactive electronic device. Virtual Reality 23, 197–211 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0356-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0356-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation