Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

30 J. Takatalo et al. into one framework and to study the UX in games as multidimensional and psychological in nature. 3.1.4 Presence-Involvement-Flow Framework (PIFF) PIFF is a psychological research framework to study experiences in digital games. It has been constructed on the basis of the extensive concepts of the sense of presence, involvement, and flow. They represent the psychological compartments in digital games well: Presence (Lombard and Ditton 1997) describes the perception of and attention to the game world and both spatial and social cognitions in game play, involvement (Zaichkowsky 1985) is considered a measure of gamer motivation, and flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1975) refers to the subjective, cognitive-emotional evaluation of the game. Each concept includes subcomponents that are relevant to both technical game components and psychological determinants of the UX. 3.1.4.1 Presence and Involvement Gamers often mention realistic high-quality graphical interface and an engaging narrative as central game components responsible for various game-related feeling (Sweetser and Johnson 2004, Wood et al. 2004). The feeling of being in a realistic place with others is indeed the core idea of the concept of presence (Lombard and Ditton 1997). Presence has been studied in a variety of different media, for instance, in virtual environments, movies, and television (Schuemie et al. 2001). The research on presence has extensive theoretical and empirical foundations. Hence, it provides valid and tested metrics to study experiences in games (Pinchbeck and Stevens 2005). The subcomponents of presence are proven to be especially useful when the intensity and extensity of the UX is evaluated (Takatalo et al. 2006a). The following three subcomponents of presence have been used to study the “sense of being there” or spatial presence in mediated environments: attention (psychological immersion), perceptual realness (naturalness), and spatial awareness (engagement) (Lombard and Ditton 1997). This threefold construct has also been reliably extracted in empirical studies (Lessiter et al. 2001, Schubert et al. 2001). Additionally, the level of arousal and the range and consistency of the physical interaction are integral parts of spatial presence (Lombard and Ditton 1997). Social content is a significant factor in many games and it elicits the sense of social presence. In Lombard and Ditton’s (1997) explication, social presence was composed of social richness, social realism, and co-presence (shared space). These aspects correspond well to the social features found in digital games, such as, narrative and the engagement with one’s own role in a story. Social richness refers to the extent to which a game is perceived as personal and intimate. Social realism refers to the sense of similarity between real-world and game-world objects, people and events. Co-presence is the feeling of being and acting in a game together with other agents. We have found out a clear distinction between presence and the motivational concept of involvement (Takatalo et al. 2006b). Psychologically, involvement is defined
3 Presence, Involvement, and Flow in Digital Games 31 as a motivational continuum toward a particular object or situation (Rothschild 1984). Involvement concerns the level of relevance based on inherent needs, values, and interests attached to that situation or an object (Zaichkowsky 1985). Thus, involvement determines the meaning and value of the UX. The main interest here is not in what motivates gamers to play, but in understanding the meaning and personal relevance of the game. Weather we want to understand UX in a high-end technological setup or mobile device in a rush-hour subway meaning plays always a key role. Involvement is a central and well-established concept in the field of buyer behavior studies (Brennan and Mavondo 2000). It includes two distinct but closely related dimensions: importance and interest (McQuarrie and Munson 1992). Importance is dominantly a cognitive dimension concerning the meaning and relevance of the stimulus, whereas interest is composed of emotional and value-related valences (Schiefele 1991). This makes importance similar to the cognitive involvement subcomponent that was extracted by Jennett et al. (2008). On the other hand, interest is close to Lazzaro’s (2004) curiosity and the will to find out something new in a game. Curiously enough, we have found out that first-person shooters are less involving compared to third person role-playing games (Takatalo et al. 2006a), but it is difficult to point out exactly which game components affect involvement the most. Taken together, presence and involvement indicate the switch between the real world and a game, namely, the way gamers willingly form a relationship with the physical and social features of the game. 3.1.4.2 Flow The concept of flow in PIFF describes the subjective, qualitative direction of the UX. In psychological terms, it explains the cognitive evaluation and emotional outcomes of the game play. The cognitive evaluation is often related to game mechanics. In PIFF, the cognitive evaluation of the game concerns, for example, game challenges and gamer skills. These evaluations are related to a number of emotional outcomes (e.g., enjoyment, boredom). This way of looking at the subcomponents of flow is based on different flow-channel models, such as the four-channel flow model (Csikszentmihalyi 1975). The flow-channel models share the idea that there are certain cognitions that are followed by emotions. In an ideal situation where skills and challenges are high and in balance, an optimal state of flow occurs. Such a close coupling of cognitions and emotions is widely acknowledged in psychology in cognitive theories of emotion (Lazarus 1991b). Cognitive evaluations by the gamers and the related emotional outcomes provide useful subcomponents for analyzing the UX from the first hour of play to the full completion of the game. In addition to describing the subjective evaluations of challenge and skill, the flow theory (Csikszentmihalyi 1975) also considers clear goals and instant feedback as important features that are evaluated cognitively in a given situation. The theory also includes the sense of control, the level of arousal, concentration, time distortion, the loss of self-consciousness, and the merging of action and awareness as prerequisites or correlates of the flow experience. In PIFF, the level of arousal, concentration, and time distortion are included as subcomponents of presence. This theoretical
Page 2 and 3:
Human-Computer Interaction Series E
Page 4 and 5:
Regina Bernhaupt Editor Evaluating
Page 6:
For Philippe
Page 9 and 10: viii Foreword Chapter 3, Presence I
Page 11 and 12: x Foreword personality which evolve
Page 14 and 15: Contents Part I Introduction to Eva
Page 16 and 17: Contributors Regina Bernhaupt IRIT,
Page 18: Contributors xvii Manfred Tscheligi
Page 21 and 22: xx About the Authors Emily Brown is
Page 23 and 24: xxii About the Authors a post-docto
Page 25 and 26: xxiv About the Authors Christina Ko
Page 27 and 28: xxvi About the Authors MIT Media La
Page 29: xxviii About the Authors Theft Auto
Page 33 and 34: Chapter 1 User Experience Evaluatio
Page 35 and 36: 1 User Experience Evaluation in Ent
Page 37: 1 User Experience Evaluation in Ent
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 2 Enabling Social Play: A F
Page 43 and 44: 2 Enabling Social Play 13 It is als
Page 45 and 46: 2 Enabling Social Play 15 observati
Page 47 and 48: 2 Enabling Social Play 17 for playe
Page 49 and 50: 2 Enabling Social Play 19 to provid
Page 51 and 52: 2 Enabling Social Play 21 Colwell J
Page 53 and 54: Chapter 3 Presence, Involvement, an
Page 55 and 56: 3 Presence, Involvement, and Flow i
Page 59: 3 Presence, Involvement, and Flow i
Page 77 and 78: Chapter 4 Assessing the Core Elemen
Page 79 and 80: 4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 101: 4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 104 and 105: 74 E. Brown (2005). Björk and Holo
Page 106 and 107: 76 E. Brown 5.2.3 How We Work Toget
Page 108 and 109: 78 E. Brown could be simulated on p
Page 110 and 111:
80 E. Brown 5.3.2 Pre-production At
Page 112 and 113:
82 E. Brown from the code. This is
Page 114 and 115:
84 E. Brown At this point, there is
Page 116 and 117:
86 E. Brown Game developers have be
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 6 Investigating Experiences
Page 121 and 122:
6 Investigating Experiences and Att
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135:
Page 138 and 139:
108 G. McAllister and G.R. White Th
Page 140 and 141:
110 G. McAllister and G.R. White su
Page 142 and 143:
112 G. McAllister and G.R. White of
Page 144 and 145:
114 G. McAllister and G.R. White te
Page 146 and 147:
116 G. McAllister and G.R. White qu
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
120 G. McAllister and G.R. White 7.
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
124 G. McAllister and G.R. White an
Page 156 and 157:
126 G. McAllister and G.R. White Al
Page 158 and 159:
128 G. McAllister and G.R. White Ne
Page 161 and 162:
Chapter 8 User Experience Design fo
Page 163 and 164:
8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177:
Page 180 and 181:
150 K. Poels et al. in games. This
Page 182 and 183:
152 K. Poels et al. their game char
Page 184 and 185:
154 K. Poels et al. If we apply thi
Page 186 and 187:
156 K. Poels et al. Participants ge
Page 188 and 189:
158 K. Poels et al. 9.3.2 Exploring
Page 190 and 191:
160 K. Poels et al. If our train is
Page 192 and 193:
162 K. Poels et al. would be intere
Page 195 and 196:
Chapter 10 Evaluating User Experien
Page 197 and 198:
10 Evaluating User Experience Facto
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213:
Page 217 and 218:
Chapter 11 Evaluating Exertion Game
Page 219 and 220:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 189 pr
Page 221 and 222:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 191 th
Page 223 and 224:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 193 to
Page 225 and 226:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 195 co
Page 227 and 228:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 197 11
Page 229 and 230:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 199 an
Page 231 and 232:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 201 11
Page 233 and 234:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 203 to
Page 235 and 236:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 205 Ac
Page 237:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 207 Pa
Page 240 and 241:
210 M. Brown et al. challenges that
Page 242 and 243:
212 M. Brown et al. was also happen
Page 244 and 245:
214 M. Brown et al. Another importa
Page 246 and 247:
216 M. Brown et al. Albinsson and Z
Page 248 and 249:
218 M. Brown et al. asked to report
Page 250 and 251:
220 M. Brown et al. Table 12.2 Mean
Page 252 and 253:
222 M. Brown et al. Table 12.7 Cont
Page 254 and 255:
224 M. Brown et al. Table 12.9 Cont
Page 256 and 257:
226 M. Brown et al. Count 450 400 3
Page 258 and 259:
228 M. Brown et al. feedback. Thus,
Page 260 and 261:
230 M. Brown et al. Desurvivre H, C
Page 263 and 264:
Chapter 13 Using Heuristics to Eval
Page 265 and 266:
13 Using Heuristics to Evaluate the
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Index A Advanced interaction games,
show all

Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?