Co-experience: Understanding user experiences in social interaction

More documents

Recommendations

Info

INTRODUCTION Usability experts know that while usability is important, it is not enough on its own to guarantee a product’s success with customers. While helping people take advantage of the functionality, usability also needs to pave the road for pleasure. Usability techniques can be used to improve a given solution but they do not reveal if another kind of solution might deliver better and more enjoyable experiences. Consequently, design has begun to apply hedonistic psychology (Jordan 2000, Hassenzahl 2003) and to design for user experience. For example, Jordan takes a hedonistic perspective by proposing that pleasure with products is the sum of sociopleasure, ideopleasure, physiopleasure and psychopleasure. He defines pleasure with products as “the emotional, hedonic and practical benefits associated with products” (Jordan 2000: 12). Hassenzahl (2003) shows that satisfaction, a part of usability, is the sum of pragmatic and hedonic quality. However, as Desmet (2002) notes, the problem with focusing on pleasure is that it ignores the unpleasant emotional experiences related to product use. Perhaps to overcome this deficiency, user experience has become the new buzzword in design (for example, see Kuniavsky 2003, Shedroff 2001, Garrett 2003). User experience is subjective and holistic. It has both utilitarian and emotional aspects, which change over time (Rhea 1992). In this paper, we deal with what we see as a major problem in the user experience literature, which is its implicit individualistic bias. We refer to the mostly missing social quality of experience with the term “co-experience”, and propose an interactionist perspective for studying co-experience. We show that with this concept, we are able to pay attention to things that are not addressed by existing theories of user experience. We illustrate this perspective by showing how people communicate emotions with each other with mobile multimedia technology. THREE APPROACHES TO USER EXPERIENCE 134 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES Currently there are three main approaches to applying and interpreting user experience in design. These are the measuring approach, the empathic approach, and the pragmatist approach. The role of emotional experiences is important in all three, although, as they stem from different disciplines, they treat emotions differently. The measuring approach is mainly used in development and testing. It builds on the notion that experiences can be measured via emotional reactions. Thus, the approach is narrow – the definition only includes those aspects of user experience that can be measured and by measuring understood and improved. There
are several alternative orientations within the approach. The first builds on the idea that people experience things as reactions in their bodies. People’s bodies react to situations chemically and electrically, and experience this reaction in terms of emotions. As these reactions are often fleeting and not easy to verbalize, tools for monitoring those reactions, such as facial expressions or changes in galvanic skin response, can be recorded to understand when and where people get frustrated (Picard 1997). A second orientation is based on subjective reports (see e.g. Jordan 2000). For instance, Desmet (2002) has developed a testing tool to elicit emotional responses to products such as cars. His tool, PrEmo, uses animated cartoon characters to describe 14 different emotional responses. By selecting all that apply, the user creates an emotional profile. Universal evaluation criteria for user experience do not exist, though some have been proposed for interaction design (Alben 1996). Rather, the “soft and emotional experiences” need to be translated into “experience goals” relevant to each project, and included in the testing of products and prototypes (Teague & Whitney 2002). The empathic approach also claims that experience is emotional in nature, but that the kinds of experiences that products should elicit should be connected to the needs, dreams and motivations of individuals (Dandavate et al. 1996, Black 1998). Designing for user experience begins with creating a rich, empathic understanding of the users’ desired experiences and only then designing concepts and products to support them. The term “design empathy” has been around since the late 1990’s to describe the role of the designer/researcher (Leonard & Rayport 1997, Segal & Fulton Suri 1997, Koskinen et al. 2003). Design empathy makes use not only of the emotions of the users, but also those of the designers. In order to become not merely informed but also inspired, designers must both observe and feel for the users (Mäkelä & Fulton Suri 2001, Kankainen 2002). The methods used in the empathic approaches aim to provide an understanding of the users’ experiences with qualitative methods, but they also assist users in constructing for designers descriptions of their experiences, dreams, expectations and life context to the designers (Dandavate et al. 1996). Typically these methods combine visual and textual data, self-documentation, and projective tasks, of which several are used in parallel. This approach aims to inspire designers rather than produce testable hypotheses through measurement and conceptual elaboration. The pragmatist approach borrows much of its perspective from pragmatist philosophy (cf. Dewey 1934). Recently, Forlizzi and Ford (2000) presented a model of user experience in interaction. This model is theoretical in nature, and shows that experiences are momentary constructions that grow from the interaction between people and their environment. In their terminology, experi- ARTICLE 4 135
Page 3 and 4:
Katja Battarbee UNDERSTANDING USER
Page 5 and 6:
FOR YOU
Page 7 and 8:
4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES 101 1 IT
Page 9 and 10:
an experience, the recipient is use
Page 11 and 12:
It takes a group to turn a design s
Page 15 and 16:
1 INTRO - DUCTION 1.1 FOCUS AND AIM
Page 17 and 18:
duction cycles are short and the st
Page 19 and 20:
fizzy flavoured water seem to be ab
Page 21 and 22:
tronic, and there was no movement o
Page 23 and 24:
and content developers to channel t
Page 25 and 26:
1.3 WHAT IS DESIGN FOR USER EXPERIE
Page 27 and 28:
longer process, in the order of mon
Page 29 and 30:
something independent of being and
Page 31 and 32:
panies are more likely to publish r
Page 33 and 34:
3 CO-EXPERIENCE takes the most prom
Page 37 and 38:
2 USER EXPERIENCE DEMYSTIFIED This
Page 39 and 40:
ecause of the way people enjoy chal
Page 41 and 42:
ness - the ability to facilitate ta
Page 43 and 44:
43 ACTION GOAL goal goal goal actio
Page 45 and 46:
Interaction designers who focus on
Page 47 and 48:
other kinds of products. These mode
Page 49 and 50:
THE MOMENT PAST EXPERIENCE DREAMS F
Page 51 and 52:
experiences with products that do n
Page 53 and 54:
53 ACTION INHERENT INFORMATION AUGM
Page 55 and 56:
Hassenzahl defines fun as a mode of
Page 57 and 58:
ing, and coveting products all elic
Page 59 and 60:
verbal self-reports are subject to
Page 61 and 62:
veen’s alarm clock (ibid.) is int
Page 63 and 64:
spaces illustrates, merely telling
Page 65 and 66:
even artistic, approach that treats
Page 67 and 68:
BEHAVIOUR EXPERIENCE 67 OBSERVATION
Page 69 and 70:
FIGURE 14 69 Empathic observations
Page 71 and 72:
Liz Sanders has been influential in
Page 73 and 74:
FIGURE 17 73 Examples of self docum
Page 76:
3.1 REALITY SEEKS THEORY FOR SERIOU
Page 80 and 81:
3.1 REALITY SEEKS THEORY FOR SERIOU
Page 82 and 83:
3.1.1 EXPERIENCES IN SOCIAL INTERAC
Page 84 and 85: He succeeds in terminating the repo
Page 86 and 87: 86 3 CO-EXPERIENCE drawn from the c
Page 88 and 89: 21 FIGURES 20 The actual fishing ex
Page 90 and 91: 90 3 CO-EXPERIENCE typically half-w
Page 92 and 93: field testing as an early research
Page 94 and 95: ple explore a product or a technolo
Page 96 and 97: the time (articles 1 Mäkelä & Bat
Page 98: 1 IT’S FUN TO DO THINGS TOGETHER
Page 102 and 103: 102 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES cial
Page 104 and 105: 104 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES
Page 106 and 107: The results of the two user studies
Page 108 and 109: FIGURE 2 One of the users with a Ph
Page 110 and 111: joyed the challenge of breaking the
Page 112 and 113: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the other
Page 114 and 115: KEYWORDS User experience, interacti
Page 116 and 117: pretation act to shape the experien
Page 120 and 121: CATEGORIES AND SUBJECT DESCRIPTORS:
Page 122 and 123: make proposals and counterproposals
Page 124 and 125: The first message (figure 1) is jus
Page 126 and 127: and sunniest time of year. The “f
Page 128 and 129: ecome fluent in forms of media, the
Page 130 and 131: mote storytelling. [3] Narration an
Page 132 and 133: in Computer Systems 2002, Minneapol
Page 136 and 137: 136 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES ence
Page 138 and 139: 138 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES Simil
Page 140 and 141: ticipant was given a MMS phone (eit
Page 142 and 143: Sometimes experiences belong to lar
Page 144 and 145: From Liisa: 11 th July 2002 6:35 p.
Page 146 and 147: People may also align with negative
Page 148 and 149: From Thomas: 16 th July 2002 1:41 p
Page 150 and 151: 150 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES disti
Page 152 and 153: 152 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES 6. Bl
Page 154 and 155: 52. Taylor, A. and Harper, R. (2002
Page 156 and 157: CATEGORIES AND SUBJECT DESCRIPTORS:
Page 158 and 159: 158 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES proac
Page 160 and 161: USER-PRODUCT INTERACTIONS: FLUENT,
Page 162 and 163: 162 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES end,
Page 164 and 165: tive, often shared experiences - su
Page 166 and 167: 166 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES inter
Page 168 and 169: oth a subjective and objective view
Page 170 and 171: 170 4 PRESENTING THE ARTICLES T. Ed
Page 174 and 175: This leads us to the core question
Page 176 and 177: that resist all your attempts to un
Page 178 and 179: or even grass. This poses new chall
Page 180 and 181: FIGURE 2 The large emply piazza. FI
Page 182 and 183: INTERVENTIONS A first attempt to sp
Page 184 and 185:
• After recording, preview the me
Page 186 and 187:
A SCENARIO FOR THE SATELLITES The s
Page 188 and 189:
pants can experience affective inti
Page 190 and 191:
the importance of qualitative exper
Page 192:
A AFFECTIVE COMPUTING WEBSITE . . .
Page 196 and 197:
196 REFERENCES Beyer, Hugh. & Karen
Page 198 and 199:
198 REFERENCES Garrett, Jesse James
Page 200 and 201:
200 REFERENCES The ever improving d
Page 202 and 203:
202 REFERENCES Picard, Rosalind W.
Page 204:
1900 ZEPPELIN, ESCALATOR . . . . .
Page 208 and 209:
EVENTS, INVENTIONS, ART, CULTURE DE
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
show all

Co-experience: Understanding user experiences in social interaction

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?