Kerstin Klöckner
ABSTRACT
The following paper deals with quality properties that extend the traditional understanding of usability with its focus on the pragmatic aspects like efficiency and effectiveness on task performance in the context of business applications. The contribution of the approach is tow folded. First: We show how psychological theories about motivation and creativity can bridge the gap between business goals and users' goals and attitude with interaction design. We introduce an engineering approach that allows to deliberately design for fun/joy in a given business context. Second: We show how to reuse the experience from former or other projects by describing the interaction design as pattern candidates. This approach has been applied successfully many times and we elaborate it in a case study conducted for one of our clients, including an empirical evaluation that shows an improved working behavior and increased user acceptance of the software.
- Hassenzahl, M., The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between User and Product, in Funology: from usability to enjoyment, M.A. Blythe, et al., Editors. 2003, Kluwer Academic Publishers. p. 31--42. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Blythe, M., M. Hassenzahl, and P. Wright, More funology. Interactions, 2004. 11(5).Google Scholar
- Hassenzahl, M. and N. Tractinsky, Empirical studies of the user experience. Behavior and Information Technology, 2006(A special issue).Google Scholar
- Norman, D., Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Book, 2005Google Scholar
- Shneiderman, B., Designing for fun: how can we design user interfaces to be more fun? interactions, 2004. 11(5): p. 48--50. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ahn, L., Games with a purpose. IEEE Computer, 2006. 39(6): p. 92--94. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Harbich, S., Hassenzahl, M. Beyond Task Completion in the Workplace: Execute, Engage, Evolve, Expand. In Christian Peter, Russell Beale, editors, Affect and Emotion in Human-Computer Interaction, From Theory to Applications. Volume 4868 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 154--162, Springer, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- ISO 9241-11, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) -- Part 11: Guidance on usability (FOREIGN STANDARD). 1998.Google Scholar
- Constantine, L.L. and L.A.D. Lockwood, A Practical Guide to the Essential Models and Methods of Usage-Centered Design. 1999: Addison-Wesley. 579. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cooper, A. and R. Reimann, About face 2.0: The essentials of interaction design. 2003: NY: John Wiley & Sons. 576. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gerhardt-Powals, J., Cognitive engineering principles for enhancing human-computer performance. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1996. 8(2): p. 189--211. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lidwell, W., K. Holden, and J. Butler, Universal principles of design. 2003: Rockport Publishers. 216.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J., Ten Usability Heuristics. 1994.Google Scholar
- Shneiderman, B., Designing the user interface. Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. 1998: MA: Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tognazzini, B., First principles of interaction design. 2003.Google Scholar
- Geen, R.G., Human motivation: A social psychological approach. 1994: Belmont, CA: Cole. 368.Google Scholar
- Weiner, B., Achievement motivation and attribution theory. 1974: Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A., Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of psychology, 1994. 3(2): p. 368--369.Google Scholar
- Rotter, J., Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 1966. 80(1): p. 1--28.Google Scholar
- Bell, B. and S. Kozlowski, Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2002. 87(3): p. 497--505.Google Scholar
- Csikszentmihalyi, M., Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. 1990: New York: Harper and Row. 320.Google Scholar
- Maslow, A.H., Motivation and personality. 1954: New York: Harper.Google Scholar
- Herzberg, F., B. Mausner, and B.B. Snyderman, The Motivation to Work. 1959: New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Reiss, S., Who am I? The 16 basic desires that motivate our actions and define our personalities. 2000: New York: Tarcher/Putnam. 280.Google Scholar
- Heider, F., The psychology of interpersonal relations. 1958: New York: Wiley. 322.Google Scholar
- Festinger, L., A theory of cognitive dissonance. 1957: Stanford University Press. 291.Google Scholar
- Heider, F., Attitudes and cognitive organization. Journal of Psychology, 1946. 21(1): p. 107--112.Google Scholar
- Bem, D., Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of the cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 1967. 74(1): p. 183--200.Google Scholar
- Cialdini, R.B., et al., Reciprocal Concessions Procedure for Inducing Compliance: The door-in the face Technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975. 31(1): p. 206--215.Google Scholar
- Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo, The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion, in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, L. Berkowitz, Editor. 1996, New York: Academic Press. p. 123--205.Google Scholar
- Sherif, M. and C.I. Hovland, Social Judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. 1961: New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Cushman, P., Constructing the Self, Constructing America: A cultural history of psychotherapy. 1995: US, Canada: Da Capo Press. 414.Google Scholar
- Fogg, B.J., Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. 2003: Elsevier, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc. 312. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schmid, K., Making AI Systems more creative: the IPC-model. Knowledge-Based Sytems, 1996. 9(6): p. 385--397.Google Scholar
- Hadamard, J., The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. 1954: Dover Publications. 145.Google Scholar
- Daupert, D., The Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving manual. 2002.Google Scholar
- Poincare, H., The Foundations of Science: Science and Hypothesis, The Value of Science. 1982: Science and Method, Univ. Press of America.Google Scholar
- Boden, M., The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. 1990: Basic Books, New York. 344. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kerkow, D., Graf, C., KREA-FUN: Systematic Creativity for Enjoyable Software Applications, Workshop: Design principles for software that engages its users at the Interact 2007 Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.Google Scholar
- Prümper, J.; Anft, M. (1993): Die Evaluation von Software auf Grundlage des Entwurfs zur internationalen Ergonomie-Norm ISO 9241 Teil 10. In K.H.Rödiger (Ed.), Software-Ergonomie '93. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner, S. 145--156.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hassenzahl, M.; Burmester, M.; Koller, F. (2003): AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In Ziegler, J.; Szwillus, G. (Hrsg.), Mensch & Computer 2003. Interaktion in Bewe-gung. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner, S. 187--196.Google Scholar
- Klöckner, K., Nass, Claudia, and Dobrajc M. "Veto": Eine empirische Studie über die Steigerung der User Experience durch Autonomie. In: Brau, H., Diefenbach, S., Hassenzahl, M., Kohler, K., Koller, F., Peissner, M., Petrovic, K., Thielsch, M., Ullrich, D., and Zimmermann, D. (Eds): Usability Professionals 2009, pp. 13--17.Google Scholar
- Gamma, E., et al., Design Patterns -- Elements of Reusable Object Oriented Software. 1995: Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tidwell, J., Common ground: A Pattern Language for Human-Computer Interface Design.Google Scholar
- Dearden, A. and J. Finlay, Pattern Languages in HCI: A Critical Review. Human-Computer Interaction, 2006. 21: p. 49--102.Google Scholar
- Tidwell, J., Designing "Designing Interfaces:" How Not to Write a Pattern Catalog. Presentation held at UPA 2007. URL {last visited March 12 2010}: jtidwell.net/talks/UPA2007_Designing_Designing_Interfaces.pptGoogle Scholar
- Tidwell, J., Designing Interfaces: Patterns for Effective Interaction Design. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2006 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Welie, van Martijn, Interaction Design Patterns. http://www.welie.com/patterns/ {last visited March 12 2010}Google Scholar
- Niebuhr, S., K. Kohler, and C. Graf. Engaging Patterns: Challenges and Means shown at an Example. in Engineering Interactive Systems EHCI. 2007. Salamanca, Spain.Google Scholar
- Klöckner, K., and Kohler, K. Softwareentwickler als Intreaktionsgestalter: Erfahrungen zu Einsatz und Verwendung von Interaktionspattern. In: Brau, H., Diefenbach, S., Hassenzahl, M., Koller, F., Peissner, M, and Röse, K. (Eds.): Usability Professionals 2008. pp. 83--87.Google Scholar
- Kohler, K., S. Niebuhr, and M. Hassenzahl. Stay on the ball! An interaction pattern approach to the engineering of motivation. In Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2007. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer, pp. 88--92. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nass, C., Kerkow, D., and Jung, J. The Fulfillment of User Needs and the Course of Time in Field Investigation. Accepted at CHI 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Aligning business goals and user goals by engineering hedonic quality
Recommendations
The Business Goals Viewpoint
Architectures come about through forces and needs other than those captured in traditional requirements documents. A business goal expresses why a system is being developed and what stakeholders in the developing organization, the customer organization, ...
Business goals as architectural knowledge
SHARK '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural KnowledgeIn this paper we argue that business goals constitute an important type of architectural knowledge. Quality attributes are often the primary drivers (shaping forces) behind an architecture, but quality attributes derive from an organization's business ...
Using Business Goals to Inform a Software Architecture
RE '10: Proceedings of the 2010 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering ConferenceRequirements specifications seldom allow software and system architects to understand the business goals for a system. Architects need that information in order to design an appropriate architecture for the problem at hand. In this paper, we present a ...
Comments