Ensuring Validity in StrategicUX Research Methods Dr. Carine Lallemand
University of Luxembourg @carilallUX STRAT Europe 2016
01
WHO AM I?CARINE LALLEMAND
« I DESIGN, ADAPT AND VALIDATE
UX RESEARCH METHODS »
Carine LallemandGuillaume Gronier
Méthodes de design
30 MÉTHODES FONDAMENTALES POUR CONCEVOIR ET ÉVALUER LES SYSTÈMES INTERACTIFS
DESIGN
32 € Conc
eptio
n N
ord
Com
po
DESIGN
Articulant théorie et pratique, cet ouvrage présente 30 fiches méthodologiques couvrant l’essentiel du design UX et de l’ergonomie des interactions homme-machine (IHM). Vous serez guidé pas à pas à travers les étapes de réalisation de chaque méthode et accompagné pour prendre les décisions les plus adaptées à votre projet. Chaque fiche méthode intègre égale-ment une partie théorique et des illustrations concrètes pour faciliter la compréhension.
Véritable portfolio théorique et méthodologique, cet ouvrage est un guide indispensable à toute personne impliquée dans la conception de systèmes interactifs. Professionnels, chefs de projets, étudiants, enseignants et chercheurs y trouveront de précieuses ressources pour mener à bien leurs projets.
Grâce aux méthodes d’UX design, créez des produits et des services qui attirent, qui captivent, qui enchantent et inspirent pour améliorer la vie de ceux qui les utilisent !
AU SOMMAIREIntroduction au design UX ⍟ Planification ⍟ Définition du projet ⍟ Recrute-ment des utilisateurs ⍟ Déontologie et éthique ⍟ Exploration ⍟ Entretien ⍟ Focus group ⍟ Observation ⍟ Questionnaire exploratoire ⍟ Sondes culturelles ⍟ Idéation ⍟ Brainstorming ⍟ Cartes d’idéation ⍟ Design studio ⍟ Experience maps ⍟ Personas ⍟ Techniques génératives ⍟ Génération ⍟ Design persuasif ⍟ Gamification ⍟ Iconographie ⍟ Maquettage ⍟ Storyboarding ⍟ Tri de cartes ⍟ Évaluation ⍟ Complétion de phrases ⍟ Courbes d’éva-luation UX ⍟ Échelles d’utilisabilité ⍟ Échelles UX ⍟ Éva-luation des émotions ⍟ Évaluation experte ⍟ Inspection cognitive ⍟ Journal de bord UX ⍟ Test des 5 secondes ⍟ Tests utilisateurs
Code
G14
143
ISBN
978
-2-2
12-1
4143
-6
« Aucun ouvrage francophone ne rassemble autant
de savoir-faire ! Simple, pratique et pédagogique,
c’est LE guide essentiel de l’UX au quotidien. »
Corinne Leulier, Psychologue - Ergonome,
directrice UX chez Klee Group
« Ergonomie, psychologie, ingénierie, design, sociologie,
ethnographie… Ce livre est une formidable proposition
pragmatique, claire et actualisée des méthodes pour
la conception et l’évaluation de l’expérience utilisateur ! »
Julien Kahn, responsable pôle ergonomie
chez Orange
Chercheur à l’université de Luxembourg, Carine Lallemand est spécialisée dans les méthodes de conception et d’évaluation de l’expérience utilisateur (UX). Impliquée depuis 2010 dans l’association FLUPA, elle est également conférencière et enseigne l’UX design. Guillaume Gronier est chercheur ergo-nome au Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology. Ses principales activités portent sur l’amélioration de l’expérience utilisateur, l’acceptation technologique et l’implication des utilisateurs dans le processus de conception. Il est l’un des fondateurs de l’association FLUPA.
Méthodes de design UX
UX
Car
ine
Lall
eman
dG
uilla
ume
Gro
nie
rM
étho
des
de d
esig
n UX
Préface d’Alain Robillard-Bastien
FORMER VICE-PRESIDENT
CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER
RESEARCHER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG
@CARILALL
01
WE NEED TO BASE STRATEGIC DECISIONSON VALID FINDINGS
01
COLLECTING VALID AND RELIABLE DATA?
—> VALID & RELIABLE —> CONTEXTUALIZED & DYNAMIC
Asking SIRI?
Making a good guess?
On-site live wind measurement
Meteorological information provided by official services
How can you safeguard a UX strategy by ensuring the quality of research
conclusions?
Whenever we measure or observe we should be concerned with whether we are measuring what we intend to measure or with how our observations are
influenced by the circumstances in which they are made
© Adam Cooper (2014)
UNDERSTANDING VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY
Validity: are we measuring what we intend to measure?
Reliability: how stable or constant is our measure?
UX UX UX UX
01WORLD IA DAY 2016 PRESENTATION TITLE HERE
<STRATEGIC THINKING
>Doing the right things = Using the right methods
TACTICAL THINKING
Doing things right = Using the methods right
01WORLD IA DAY 2016
Some kind of illustration or image?
HEADER OPTIONSUB HEAD OR SHORT DESCRIPTION
Some kind of explanatory text, reference or footnote can go here and wrap to two lines, if needed.
USING THE RIGHT METHODS
1
© UX Booth (2016)
« Strangely, while I find the proposition to consider the experience before the thing quite a radical change, many practitioners and
academics of HCI happily embrace experience – however, without changing much in their approach. »
-Prof. Marc Hassenzahl (2013)
The nature and complexity of UX involves a deep change in the methods we use
UX is highly dynamic
The memory of an experience matters more than the experience itself
UX is highly contextual
UX is holistic1
2
3
4
5 UX is about emotions and psychological needs
UX is holistic
Thüring & Mahlke, 2007
A system’s perceived attractiveness is based on the perception of its pragmatic and hedonic qualities
System
User
Context
Interaction characteristics
Perception of non-instrumental qualities
Emotions
Perception of instrumental qualities
Components of User Experience
Consequences
overall evaluation, acceptance, intention to
use, choice of alternatives
1
System
User
Context
Interaction characteristics
Perception of non-instrumental qualities
Emotions
Perception of instrumental qualities
Components of User Experience
Consequences
overall evaluation, acceptance, intention to
use, choice of alternatives
Usability scales (SUS, QUIS, SUMI, WAMMI, etc)
established usability questionnaires focus on pragmatic aspects only… this is not enough!
1UX is holistic
Thüring & Mahlke, 2007
We need to assess both pragmatic and hedonic perceived qualities of a system
AttrakDiff scale (Hassenzahl et al., 2003)
User Experience Questionnaire
(Laugwitz et al., 2008)
meCUE scale (Minge & Riedel, 2013)
1
Using standardized and validated UX scales
The AttrakDiff scale: a standardized UX assessment tool
28 items (word pairs) divided into four subscales: • Pragmatic qualities • Hedonic qualities - stimulation • Hedonic qualities - identification • Attractiveness
• Single evaluation • Comparison product A - product B • Comparison Before - After
An abridged version (10 items) Portfolio of results (comparison A vs. B)
(Hassenzahl et al., 2003)
UX is highly contextual
Context
User System
Social context
Technical context
Temporal context
Task context
Physical context
Time
2
user testing in a controlled
environment
expert evaluation
traditional evaluation methods assess UX in an artificial environment
Context
User System
Time
2UX is highly contextual
How does UX alter laboratory evaluation?
Study conducted in 2015 (Lallemand et al., 2015)
Experiment involving 70 users, who were asked to evaluate their UX with two systems
Research objective: assessing the quality and limitations of « lab testing » for the evaluation of UX.
Results: - validity of our assessment was limited to only the
pragmatic aspects of the interaction - significant order effects - impact of the scenarios of use on the felt experience - impact of the environment and the lack of ecological
validity - lack of evaluation of the dynamics of the experience
We need to evaluate UX in a natural or realistic setting
Field testing and observation
"In-sitro" user testing (Kjeldskov et al., 2004)
Experience sampling (Csikszentmihalyi , 1990)
2
Ecological validity and the « turn to the wild »
Before usage
Anticipated UX
Imagining experience
During usage
Momentary UX
Experiencing
After usage
Episodic UX
Reflecting on an experience
Over time
Cumulative UX
Recollecting multiple periods of use
When:
What:
How:
UX White Paper, 2010
There are several time spans of UX
UX starts before the interaction and doesn’t end immediately after the interaction
UX is highly dynamic3
traditional or psychophysiological evaluation methods focus on momentary UX… this is
not enough!
UX White Paper, 2010
user testing psychophysiological measurements
Before usage
Anticipated UX
Imagining experience
During usage
Momentary UX
Experiencing
After usage
Episodic UX
Reflecting on an experience
Over time
Cumulative UX
Recollecting multiple periods of use
When:
What:
How:
UX is highly dynamic3
The memory of an experience matters more than the experience itself
Episodic UX is a reconstruction, a remembered experience biased by cognitive processes
The momentary experience is not as important as the way it is remembered.
It’s the memory of an experience that influences user’s behavior and the way he talks or recommends the product to someone
4
We need to assess UX across time and to focus on the memory of experiences
UX Curve (Kujala et al., 2011)
Diary methods
Retrospective UX assessment
Analytic scale (Karapanos et al., 2010)
Longitudinal study
3 4
The UX Curve method: retrospective UX evaluation
What they will tell you is biased by their memory, it is not similar to how they really felt
What matters is how they remember the experience with your system because they will behave on this basis.
Unvalid, yet reliable?
Author's personal copy
performed simply on the basis of whether the starting point of thecurve was higher or lower compared to the end point. For example,the curve in Fig. 2 was categorized as being improving as its start-ing point was lower than its ending point, even though the curvedeteriorates in the middle. If the starting and ending points wereat the same level, the curve was categorized as stable. As the curves
were freehand drawings, they were categorized as stable if therewas a very small deviation (less than one millimeter) betweenthe vertical values of the starting and ending points of the curve.However, it can be seen from Figs. 3–10 that the categorizationwas rather straight-forward to do with the three trend type catego-ries. The relationships between the curve types and the key
Fig. 4. The deteriorating and stable general UX Curves with user IDs.
Fig. 5. The improving Attractiveness curves with user IDs.
Fig. 6. The deteriorating and stable Attractiveness curves with user IDs.
Fig. 7. The improving ease of use curves with user IDs.
Fig. 8. The deteriorating and stable ease of use curves with user IDs.
Fig. 9. The improving utility curves with user IDs.
478 S. Kujala et al. / Interacting with Computers 23 (2011) 473–483
Author's personal copy
performed simply on the basis of whether the starting point of thecurve was higher or lower compared to the end point. For example,the curve in Fig. 2 was categorized as being improving as its start-ing point was lower than its ending point, even though the curvedeteriorates in the middle. If the starting and ending points wereat the same level, the curve was categorized as stable. As the curves
were freehand drawings, they were categorized as stable if therewas a very small deviation (less than one millimeter) betweenthe vertical values of the starting and ending points of the curve.However, it can be seen from Figs. 3–10 that the categorizationwas rather straight-forward to do with the three trend type catego-ries. The relationships between the curve types and the key
Fig. 4. The deteriorating and stable general UX Curves with user IDs.
Fig. 5. The improving Attractiveness curves with user IDs.
Fig. 6. The deteriorating and stable Attractiveness curves with user IDs.
Fig. 7. The improving ease of use curves with user IDs.
Fig. 8. The deteriorating and stable ease of use curves with user IDs.
Fig. 9. The improving utility curves with user IDs.
478 S. Kujala et al. / Interacting with Computers 23 (2011) 473–483
Results: Mean attractiveness curves8
3.6.2011
Facebook Mobile phoneLong-term UX curves (for a specific UX dimension)
Kujala et al., 2011
UX is about emotions and psychological needs
Thinking about the experience first
Designing for emotions and psychological needs
Using science-based design tools
5
Using science-based (yet pragmatic) design tools
5
UX theories as powerful triggers of innovative design ideas —> Defining your Unique Value Proposition
PLEX Cards playful experiences
(Lucéro & Arrasvuori, 2010)
Positive Emotional Granularity Cards
(Yoon, Desmet, & Pohlmeyer, 2013)
UX Cards psychological needs
(Lallemand et al., 2015)
PLEX Cards playful experiences
(Lucéro & Arrasvuori, 2010)
Positive Emotional Granularity Cards
(Yoon, Desmet, & Pohlmeyer, 2013)
UX Cards psychological needs
(Lallemand et al., 2015)
Download them now!
http://uxmind.eu/portfolio/ux-design-and-evaluation-cards
www.funkydesignspaces.com/plex/
www.diopd.org/emotioncards
Established evaluation methods only explore a limited part of UX
single user testing sessions
psychophysiological measurements
expert evaluationusability scales
As we gain a deeper understanding of UX, we have to adapt the methods we use to ensure validity
01WORLD IA DAY 2016
Some kind of illustration or image?
HEADER OPTIONSUB HEAD OR SHORT DESCRIPTION
Some kind of explanatory text, reference or footnote can go here and wrap to two lines, if needed.
USING THE METHODS RIGHT
2
UX RESEARCH METHODS ARE « Ingredients and Meals Rather Than Recipes »
…just as the quality of what is cooked reflects the quality of its ingredients, so does the quality of UX work reflect the quality of
resources as configured and combined. Woolrych et al., 2011
01
TARGETING REPRESENTATIVE USERS
THE IMPORTANCE OF SAMPLING
01
SAMPLING: TARGETING THE RIGHT USERS
Making the most out of opportunistic sampling?Probability sampling: process that gives all the individuals in the population equal chances of being selected
Opportunistic sampling: the availability of participants guides on-the-spot sampling decisions
Sample size vary in different research settings. All else being equal, large sized sample leads to increased precision in estimates of various properties of the population.
01
WHAT ABOUT GUERRILLA RESEARCH?
A reasonable option?Fast and cheap way to get a certain type of feedback
• Only for consumer-oriented product
• Testing the understanding of the Value Proposition or the usability of one specific feature
Not always ‘better than no research’
01
IDENTIFYING CONFOUNDING VARIABLES
AVOIDING RESEARCH BIASES
01
RESEARCH BIASES A few examples
Selection bias: one relevant group in the population has a higher probability of being included in the sample. —> Choosing a random or representative sample
Experimenter / interviewer bias: differential treatment of participants—> Standardized procedures and instructions.
Expectancy / observer bias: the researcher’s expectations affect the outcome of a study—> Having independent observers and computing inter-raters agreement
Social desirability bias: the tendency of respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others—> Careful formulation of questions and items. Use of projective techniques.
01
VALIDITY THROUGH DATA TRIANGULATION
USING MIXED-METHOD
01
COMBINING QUANTITATIVE & QUALITATIVE
Understanding « how » and « why »
Quantitative research methods: rely on using large sample sizes to establish trends and conclusions.
Qualitative research: appropriate for getting a more in-depth, contextual understanding of why those trends occur.
The best research strategies incorporate both approaches
Profile Unfinished sentence UX dimension
non ebook-reader
Compared with a paper book, a digital book is… Comparison between products
In my opinion, digital books are addressed to… Identity / product image
I have never read digital books because… Frustrations / Barriers to use
I would read a digital book if… Expectations and needs
I expect a digital book to / that… Expectations and needs
When I read a paper book, I feel… Affects
ebook reader
Compared with a paper book, a digital book is… Comparison between products
The reading experience on a digital book is… Global UX
The problem with ebooks is… Issues and frustrations
What I love about ebooks is… Positive aspects / Appropriation factors
What frustrates me the most with a digital book is… Issues and frustrations
I find that the interface of a digital book is… Specific UX - Interface
I dream of a digital book that… Expectations / Dreams
Ongoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015)Designing an optimal e-reading experience
01
LIKERT SCALE VS. SENTENCE COMPLETION
On a 7-points Likert scale, how would you rate your overall e-reading experience? (N = 1284)
Self-reported overall e-reading experience(7 points Likert scale)
Valence Frequency PercentNegative 228 17,8 %
Positive 817 63,9 %
Neutral 160 12,5 %
Mixted 74 5,8 %
« The reading experience on a digital book is… »
Valence analysis of sentence L_SC_2
Ongoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015)
Designing an optimal e-reading experience
01
LIKERT SCALE VS. SENTENCE COMPLETION
The problem with ebooks is…- the price- the lack of availability and choice- the absence of a sensual experience (feeling the
paper in one’s hands)- the navigation and information architecture- the battery / the need for a network connexion- their bad quality- the impossibility to lend the book to a friend- DRM (digital rights management)- the bad reading experience- the screen and visual fatigue- it is dematerialized- …
that you don’t see what people are reading because you don’t see the book cover…
you can't skim or flip through easily
I’m not able to physically track my progress in the book
Designing an optimal e-reading experienceOngoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015)
01
VALIDITY & RIGOR, YET SCALED TO THE NEED
Basing strategic decisions on valid findings
Rigor should be proportional to the risk
Catching up on emerging research and using freely available valid yet lightweight UX methods developed in Academia
Rethinking your Unique Value Proposition thanks to UX theories
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
Dr. Carine Lallemand Twitter @carilall http://uxmind.eu
01
REFERENCES• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience, Harper and Row. • Hassenzahl, Marc (2013): User Experience and Experience Design. In: Soegaard, Mads and Dam, Rikke Friis (eds.). "The Encyclopedia of
Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.". Aarhus, Denmark: The Interaction Design Foundation. • Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2003). AttrakDiff : Ein Fragebogen zur Mes- sung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer
Qualität. In J. Ziegler & G. Szwillus (Eds.) Mensch & Computer 2003. Interaktion in Bewegung, 187–196. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner. • Kahneman, D., et al., (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The Day Reconstruction Method, Science, CCCVI(5), 702. • Karapanos, E., Martens, J.-B., & Hassenzahl, M. (2010). On the Retrospective Assessment of Users’ Experiences Over Time : Memory or Actuality
? Proc. of CHI 2010, 2689-2698. • Kjeldskov, J., & Skov, M.B. (2007). Studying Usability In Sitro : Simulating Real World Phenomena in Controlled Environments. International Journal
of Human-Computer Interac- tion, 22(1-2), 7–36. • Kujala,S., Roto,V., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila,K., Karapanos,E., &Sinnelä,A. (2011). UX Curve: A method for evaluating long-term user experience.
Interacting with Computers, 23, 473-483. • Lallemand, C. (2015). Towards Consolidated Methods for the Design and Evaluation of User Experience. (Doctoral dissertation). University of
Luxembourg. https://publications.uni.lu/handle/10993/21463 • Laugwitz, B, Held, T., & Schrepp, M. (2008). Construction and evaluation of a user expe- rience questionnaire. In A. Holzinger (Ed.) USAB 2008,
LNCS 5298. Berlin: Springer Verlag. • Lucero, A., & Arrasvuori. J. (2010) PLEX Cards : a source of inspiration when designing for playfulness. Proc. of Fun and Games 2010. New York,
USA: ACM, 28-37.
01
REFERENCES• Minge, M., & Riedel, L. (2013). meCUE – Ein modularer Fragebogen zur Erfassung des Nutzungserlebens. Presented at Mensch und Computer
2013, Bremen. • Roto, V., Law, E., Vermeeren, A., & Hoonhout, J. (2011) User Experience White Paper: Bringing clarity to the concept of user experience. Result
from Dagstuhl Seminar on Demar- cating User Experience, Finland. • Thüring, M., & Mahlke, S. (2007). Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human-technology interaction. International Journal of Psychology, 42(4),
253-264. • Yoon, J., Desmet, P. M. A., & Pohlmeyer, A. E. (2013). Embodied Typology of Positive Emotions: The Development of a Tool to Facilitate Emotional
Granularity in Design (pp. 1195–1206). Presented at the 5th International Congress of International Association of Sciences of Design Research, Tokyo, Japan.
• Woolrych, A., Hornbæk, K., Frøkjær, E. & Cockton, G. (2011). “Ingredients and meals rather than recipes : a proposal for research that does not treat usability evaluation methods as indivisible wholes”. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 27(10), 940-970
• Adam Cooper, Cetis Blog 2014 - http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/ • http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/complete-beginners-guide-to-design-research/
Download the UX Cards : http://uxmind.eu/portfolio/ux-design-and-evaluation-cards Download the PLEX Cards : http://www.funkydesignspaces.com/plex/Download the Positive Emotional Granularity Cards : www.diopd.org/emotioncards
Top Related