Cargando…

Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?

The success of a software application is related to users’ willingness to keep using it. In this sense, evaluating User eXperience (UX) became an important part of the software development process. Researchers have been carrying out studies by employing various methods to evaluate the UX of software...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nakamura, Walter Takashi, Ahmed, Iftekhar, Redmiles, David, Oliveira, Edson, Fernandes, David, de Oliveira, Elaine H. T., Conte, Tayana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8156257/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34067640
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21103480
_version_ 1783699399324467200
author Nakamura, Walter Takashi
Ahmed, Iftekhar
Redmiles, David
Oliveira, Edson
Fernandes, David
de Oliveira, Elaine H. T.
Conte, Tayana
author_facet Nakamura, Walter Takashi
Ahmed, Iftekhar
Redmiles, David
Oliveira, Edson
Fernandes, David
de Oliveira, Elaine H. T.
Conte, Tayana
author_sort Nakamura, Walter Takashi
collection PubMed
description The success of a software application is related to users’ willingness to keep using it. In this sense, evaluating User eXperience (UX) became an important part of the software development process. Researchers have been carrying out studies by employing various methods to evaluate the UX of software products. Some studies reported varied and even contradictory results when applying different UX evaluation methods, making it difficult for practitioners to identify which results to rely upon. However, these works did not evaluate the developers’ perspectives and their impacts on the decision process. Moreover, such studies focused on one-shot evaluations, which cannot assess whether the methods provide the same big picture of the experience (i.e., deteriorating, improving, or stable). This paper presents a longitudinal study in which 68 students evaluated the UX of an online judge system by employing AttrakDiff, UEQ, and Sentence Completion methods at three moments along a semester. This study reveals contrasting results between the methods, which affected developers’ decisions and interpretations. With this work, we intend to draw the HCI community’s attention to the contrast between different UX evaluation methods and the impact of their outcomes in the software development process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8156257
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81562572021-05-28 Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture? Nakamura, Walter Takashi Ahmed, Iftekhar Redmiles, David Oliveira, Edson Fernandes, David de Oliveira, Elaine H. T. Conte, Tayana Sensors (Basel) Article The success of a software application is related to users’ willingness to keep using it. In this sense, evaluating User eXperience (UX) became an important part of the software development process. Researchers have been carrying out studies by employing various methods to evaluate the UX of software products. Some studies reported varied and even contradictory results when applying different UX evaluation methods, making it difficult for practitioners to identify which results to rely upon. However, these works did not evaluate the developers’ perspectives and their impacts on the decision process. Moreover, such studies focused on one-shot evaluations, which cannot assess whether the methods provide the same big picture of the experience (i.e., deteriorating, improving, or stable). This paper presents a longitudinal study in which 68 students evaluated the UX of an online judge system by employing AttrakDiff, UEQ, and Sentence Completion methods at three moments along a semester. This study reveals contrasting results between the methods, which affected developers’ decisions and interpretations. With this work, we intend to draw the HCI community’s attention to the contrast between different UX evaluation methods and the impact of their outcomes in the software development process. MDPI 2021-05-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8156257/ /pubmed/34067640 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21103480 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Nakamura, Walter Takashi
Ahmed, Iftekhar
Redmiles, David
Oliveira, Edson
Fernandes, David
de Oliveira, Elaine H. T.
Conte, Tayana
Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title_full Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title_fullStr Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title_full_unstemmed Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title_short Are UX Evaluation Methods Providing the Same Big Picture?
title_sort are ux evaluation methods providing the same big picture?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8156257/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34067640
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21103480
work_keys_str_mv AT nakamurawaltertakashi areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT ahmediftekhar areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT redmilesdavid areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT oliveiraedson areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT fernandesdavid areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT deoliveiraelaineht areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture
AT contetayana areuxevaluationmethodsprovidingthesamebigpicture