skip to main content
10.1145/1753846.1754105acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

On the retrospective assessment of users' experiences over time: memory or actuality?

Published:10 April 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

An alternative paradigm to longitudinal studies of user experience is proposed. We illustrate this paradigm through a number of recent tool-based methods. We conclude by raising a number of challenges that we need to address in order to establish this paradigm as a fruitful alternative to longitudinal studies.

References

  1. Anderson, S.J. and Conway, M.A., Investigating the structure of autobiographical memories. Learning. Memory, 1993. 19(5): p. 1178--1196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Betsch, T., Plessner, H., Schwieren, C., and Gutig, R., I like it but I don't know why: A value-account approach to implicit attitude formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2001. 27(2): p. 242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Courage, C., Jain, J., and Rosenbaum, S., Best practices in longitudinal research, in Proceedings of the 27th international conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. 2009, ACM: Boston, MA, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Fenko, A., Schifferstein, H.N.J., and Hekkert, P., Shifts in sensory dominance between various stages of user-product interactions. Applied Ergonomics, 2010. 41(1): p. 34--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Gerken, J., Bak, P., and Reiterer, H. Longitudinal evaluation methods in human-computer studies and visual analytics. in Visualization 2007: IEEE Workshop on Metrics for the Evaluation of Visual Analytics. 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Hassenzahl, M., The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Human-Computer Interaction, 2004. 19(4): p. 319--349. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hassenzahl, M. and Ullrich, D., To do or not to do: Differences in user experience and retrospective judgements depending on the presence or absence of instrumental goals. Interacting with Computers, 2007. 19: p. 429--437. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Hektner, J.M., Schmidt, J.A., and Csikszentmihalyi, M., Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life. 2007: Sage Publications Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B.L., Schreiber, C.A., and Redelmeier, D.A., When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 1993: p. 401--405.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A.B., Schkade, D.A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A.A., A Survey Method for Characterizing Daily Life Experience: The Day Reconstruction Method. 2004, American Association for the Advancement of Science. p. 1776--1780.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Karapanos, E., Hassenzahl, M., and Martens, J.-B., User experience over time, in CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. 2008, ACM: Florence, Italy. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Karapanos, E., Martens, J.B., and Hassenzahl, M., Reconstructing Experiences through Sketching. arXiv:0912.5343, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Karapanos, E., Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., and Martens, J.-B., User Experience Over Time: An initial framework, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -- CHI '09. 2009, ACM: Boston. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Khan, V.J., Markopoulos, P., Eggen, B., Ijsselsteijn, W., and de Ruyter, B. Reconexp: a way to reduce the data loss of the experiencing sampling method. in Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services 2008: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Kjeldskov, J., Skov, M.B., and Stage, J., A longitudinal study of usability in health care: Does time heal? International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Minge, M., Dynamics of User Experience, in Proceedings of the Nordichi '08 Workshop "Research Goals and Strategies for Studying User Experience and Emotion". 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Norman, D.A., THE WAY I SEE IT. Memory is more important than actuality. interactions, 2009. 16(2): p. 24--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Prümper, J., Zapf, D., Brodbeck, F.C., and Frese, M., Some surprising differences between novice and expert errors in computerized office work. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1992. 11(6): p. 319--328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Robinson, M.D. and Clore, G.L., Belief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model of emotional self-report. Psychological Bulletin, 2002. 128(6): p. 934--960.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. von Wilamowitz Moellendorff, M., Hassenzahl, M., and Platz, A., Dynamics of user experience: How the perceived quality of mobile phones changes over time, in User Experience -- Towards a unified view, Workshop at the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. On the retrospective assessment of users' experiences over time: memory or actuality?

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader