Defining usability and user experience

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Chapter Three: Literature Review – User Experience

Introduction

User experience design is complex in nature and draws on the fields of interaction design, information architecture, usability, human computer interaction and user interface design, amongst others (Preece, Sharp and Rogers, 2009). In order to understand the multifaceted and changing nature of user experiences when using or interacting with the eModerate system at a given time and place, it is necessary to define what user experience is. Clarifying the definition of user experience is also necessary in order to aid understanding of the existing user experience constructs.
User experience constructs are similar to those constructs associated with interactive product design such as usability, functionality, aesthetics, content, and look and feel with sensual and emotional appeals also being applicable (Rogers, Sharp and Preece, 2011). Hassenzahl (2005) asserts that user experience also extends to the users’ motivations and emotions, which may include negative or positive expressions. Users’ motivations and emotions include their perception of the product, system or site that they are using. These constructs contribute to the emotional outcomes of the users’ user experience which is influenced by the usability of a system (Hassenzahl, 2005; Rogers et al., 2011).
Bevan (2009) identified two specific aspects associated with user experience and usability within the context of user-centred design, and differentiated between these accordingly:

• User experience: Understand and design the user’s experience with a product, also identifies which emotional responses are evoked by using the product.
• Usability: Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the product, user comfort and satisfaction, and ensure that it is easy to use.

The purpose of this chapter is to review the concepts identified in the existing literature associated with user experience. This literature review has been used as a guide to determine which constructs and guidelines are associated with eModeration user experience evaluation. This chapter will answer the first two subquestions, namely:

• RQ1 What are the most important user experience constructs for the electronic moderation system’s framework?
• RQ2 Which existing user experience frameworks are relevant to the evaluation of electronic moderation systems?

From the previous definitions (Section 1.2) it is evident that there is a close link between user experience and usability. Section 3.2 will first provide a definition of usability which will be followed by a detailed definition of user experience. Thereafter, the relationship between usability and user experience will be discussed followed by the definition of user experience that is applicable to this study. Section 3.3 discusses different user experience constructs. Section 3.4 will discuss existing user experience frameworks and Section 3.5 the various evaluation methods which can be used to evaluate the user experience. Section 3.6 will highlight the relationship between user experience and eModerate systems.

Defining usability and user experience

System designers are responsible not only for the presentation, aesthetics, content and architecture of systems or products, but also for the usability, needs of the user and the overall user experience of a product (Bias and Mayhew, 2005; Rogers et al., 2011). Norman (2009:7) does not believe that usability should take precedence arguing that there should be a balance between “aesthetic beauty, reliability and safety, usability, cost and functionality” during the design and development process. However, Tractinsky (2013) warns designers not to overemphasise aesthetics otherwise usability is sacrificed. It is also important to note that “usability guidelines suggest that there is no inherent conflict between usability and aesthetic principles” (Tractinsky, 2013:19). The usability of a product includes aspects such as interaction, context and predisposition (McCarthy and Wright, 2007). According to Norman’s (2009) user-centered industrial design model, good design will include aesthetic pleasure and creativity while it is usable, workable, easy to interpret and understand, and enjoyable. These aspects in turn affect the users’ experience of the product, especially on an emotional level (Norman, 2013). When users start to use a product, they focus on the usability of the product; only later is there a shift from the dependency of a product’s success based on usability to user experience (Clow, 2009; Law, 2011; McCarthy and Wright, 2007; Norman, 2013).
For this reason, and in order to provide a well-rounded definition of user experience, it is necessary to first define usability as it informs the understanding of user experience.

Defining usability

The International Standards Organization (ISO) defines usability as:
“…the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use” (ISO 9241-11, 1998).
Usability has traditionally been measured against six attributes or characteristics (Nielsen, 1994a; Rogers et al., 2011):

• Learnability: How easy is it for a user to accomplish a task the first time that he or she interacts with or encounters the design?
• Efficiency: Once the design has been learnt by the user, how quickly can he or she perform the task?
• Effectiveness: This refers to how good a product is at doing what it is supposed to do. How effective is the product in allowing the user to learn, carry out his or her work efficiently, access information needed, or buy goods required?
• Safety: What errors could occur while using the product and what measures have been put in place in order for the user to easily recover from such errors?
• Memorability: How easily can a user re-establish proficiency when returning to the design after a period of nonuse?
• Errors and satisfaction: How pleasing is the design to the user?

Chow, Bridges and Commander (2014:2) define the usability of a website as being “the degree to which users seeking information find a website relevant and easy to use”. Therefore, it can be said that usability is characterised in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, safety, utility, learnability, memorability, enjoyability and user satisfaction (International Organization for Standardization, 1998; Preece et al., 2009; Rogers et al., 2011).
Usability is essential to the success of any interactive system, be it an eLearn site, a company intranet or a moderation system. According to Barnum (2002) and Nielsen (2003), if the interactive systems are difficult to implement and use, users will simply stop using them and find alternatives. This is also true for eModeration systems because if the users find the interactive system difficult to use, they will revert to manual moderation. Usability alone does not address the overall quality of user experience (Rogers et al., 2011). It is for this reason that it is necessary to consider user experience and why user experience goals have been identified in the literature review.

Definition of user experience

Hassenzahl (2005) claims that the user experience point of view extends the user-centred design approach by covering issues that go beyond practical usability and functionality. Due to the different approaches available, the definition of user experience is not settled and different viewpoints exist on how user experience should be defined.
According to the current International Organization for Standardization, standard 9241-210, human-centred design describes user experience as:
“ [a] person’s perceptions and responses resulting from the use and/or anticipated use of a product, system or service.
User experience includes all the user’s emotions, beliefs, preferences, perceptions, physical and psychological responses, behaviours and accomplishments that occur before, during and after use.
User experience is a consequence of brand image, presentation, functionality, system performance, interactive behavior and assistive capabilities of the interactive system, the user’s internal and physical state resulting from prior experiences, attitudes, skills and personality, and the context of use” (ISO 9241-210, 2010: clause 2.15).
Rubinoff (2004:2) defines user experience as follows:
“User experience refers to a concept that places the end-user at the focal point of design and development efforts, as opposed to the system, its applications or its aesthetic value alone. It’s based on the general concept of user-centred design. The user experience is primarily made up of four factors: branding, usability, functionality, and content” (Rubinoff, 2004:2).
Kuniavsky (2010:14) describes user experience as:
“[The] totality of end users’ perceptions as they interact with a product or service. These perceptions include effectiveness (how good is the result?), efficiency (how fast or cheap is it?), emotional satisfaction (how good does it feel?), and the quality of the relationship with the entity that created the product or service (what expectations does it create for subsequent interactions?)”.
Kuniavsky’s (2010) definition attempts to transcend ergonomic, attitudinal and visual metrics, including instead all aspects an individual would consider as relevant to an experience. The goal is to align developers’ understandings of the role that the product will play in the individual’s life with the way in which that individual will perceive the design of the product. The User Experience Professional Association (Usability Body of Knowledge) (Glossary, 2014) extends Kuniavsky’s (2010) definition by asserting that user experience is concerned with all of the elements that make up the interface, such as layout, visual design, text, brand, sound and the interaction of users with a product. User experience is “about creating an experience through a device” (Hassenzahl, 2013).

Chapter One: Introduction 
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Research background and rationale
1.3 Research problem statement
1.4 Research question and associated subsections
1.5 Value of the study
1.6 Scope of the study
1.7 Research methodology
1.8 Structure of the thesis
1.9 Definitions and terms
Chapter Two: Literature Review — Moderation 
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Moderation
2.3 eModeration
2.4 eModeration Guidelines
2.5 Conclusion
Chapter Three: Literature Review – User Experience 
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Defining usability and user experience
3.3 User experience constructs
3.4 User experience frameworks
3.5 Evaluating User Experience
3.6 User experience in the context of eModeration
3.7 Conclusion
Chapter Four: Research design 
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Research questions and approaches to answering them
4.3 Research
4.4 Research objectives
4.5 Research approach
4.6 Design Science Research methodology
4.7 Design and Development in Design Science Research
4.8 Evaluation methods in Design Science Research
4.9 Data collection
4.10 Data analysis
4.11 Data presentation
4.12 Ethical considerations
4.13 Conclusion
Chapter Five: Research in context 
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Positioning this research setting in Design Science Research
5.3 Moderation in context at MGI
5.4 Moderation in the context of Monash University
5.5 eModeration in context — protocol
5.6 Conclusion
Chapter Six: Design and development 
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Design and Development of a conceptual framework n 207
6.3 Case Study at MGI
6.4 Results from case study at MGI
6.5 Discussion of findings from case study at MGI
6.6 Conclusion
Chapter Seven: Testing 
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Case study MGI eModerators testing of the artifact — interviews
7.3 Conclusion
Chapter Eight: Evaluation
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Evaluation methods documentation
8.3 Case study Monash University South Africa
8.4 Conclusion
Chapter Nine: Communication and Conclusion 
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Research summary and contributions
9.3 Research limitations
9.4 Research challenges
9.5 Research findings: The User Experience Evaluation Framework for eModeration
9.6 Seven guidelines used to evaluate the Design Science Research methodology followed in this study
9.7 Discussion and future research directions for The User Experience Evaluation Framework for eModeration
9.8 Reflection
Reference list
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT