This study aims to observe user’s experience longitudinally in a natural context of use by using DRM (Day Reconstruction Method). DRM is an observation technique that periodically surveys user’s experience and evaluates it systemically. In addition to emotions collected by existing DRM, we also investigated contextual information using structured questionnaires. Each questionnaire was conducted for one episode which is composed of specific actions that are taken, context of each episode, and detailed description of mood and emotion at that time of episode occurrence with detailed reason. For a case study, DRM for the smart TV-viewing was conducted. As a result, users showed different TV-viewing behaviors depending on the day of the week. DRM also showed that users typically did not use the majority of the technical functions provided by the modern TV sets popularly used today. Moreover, we figured out that many secondary activities were conducted concurrently together with TV-viewing. The study suggested that a diary-based observation technique proposed in this paper can be used to analyze the context efficiently and quantitatively without bias.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrownB. A.SellenAbigail JO’haraKenton P. (2000). A diary study of information capture in working life. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
2.
BruniLuiginoStancaLuca. (2008). Watching alone: Relational goods, television and happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65(3), 506-528.
3.
CesarPabloChorianopoulosKonstantinos. (2009). The evolution of TV systems, content, and users toward interactivity. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction, 2(4), 373-395.
4.
ChorianopoulosKonstantinosSpinellisDiomidis. (2006). User interface evaluation of interactive TV: a media studies perspective. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(2), 209-218.
5.
DeppColin ASchkadeDavid AThompsonWesley KJesteDilip V. (2010). Age, affective experience, and television use. American journal of preventive medicine, 39(2), 173-178.
6.
DesmetPieter MAHekkertPaul. (2007). Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57-66.
7.
ForlizziJodi. (2007). How robotic products become social products: an ethnographic study of cleaning in the home. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
8.
ForlizziJodiBattarbeeKatja. (2004). Understanding experience in interactive systems. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques.
9.
FreemanJonathanLessiterJane. (2003). Using attitude based segmentation to better understand viewers’ usability issues with digital and interactive TV. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1st European conference on interactive television: from viewers to actors.
10.
GableGuy G. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112-126.
11.
HartmannJanDe AngeliAntonellaSutcliffeAlistair. (2008). Framing the user experience: information biases on website quality judgement. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
12.
HassenzahlMarc. (2008). User experience (UX): towards an experiential perspective on product quality. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the Association Francophone d’Interaction Homme-Machine.
13.
HassenzahlMarcLawE Lai-ChongHvannbergEbba Thora. (2006). User Experience-Towards a unified view. UX WS NordiCHI, 6, 1-3.
14.
HassenzahlMarcTractinskyNoam. (2006). User experience-a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2), 91-97.
15.
HyldegårdJette. (2006). Using diaries in group based information behavior research: a methodological study. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Information interaction in context.
16.
ISO 9241. (1997). Ergonomic requirements for office systems with visual display terminals(VDTs). International Standards Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.
17.
ISO DIS 9241-210. (2008). Ergonomics of human system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (formerly known as 13407). International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Switzerland.
18.
JordanPatrick W. (1998). Human factors for pleasure in product use. Applied ergonomics, 29(1), 25-33.
19.
Jumisko-PyykköSatuMandyWeitzelDominikStrohmeier. (2008). Designing for user experience: what to expect from mobile 3D TV and video?Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Designing interactive user experiences for TV and video.
20.
KahnemanDanielKruegerAlan B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. The journal of economic perspectives, 20(1), 3-24.
21.
KahnemanDanielKruegerAlan BSchkadeDavid ASchwarzNorbertStoneArthur A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 306(5702), 1776-1780.
22.
KarapanosEvangelosZimmermanJohnForlizziJodiMartensJean-Bernard. (2009). User experience over time: an initial framework. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
23.
KaulioMatti A. (1998). Customer, consumer and user involvement in product development: A framework and a review of selected methods. Total Quality Management, 9(1), 141-149.
24.
KraftChristian. (2012). User experience innovation: User centered design that works: Apress.
25.
KubeyRobert. (1986). Television Use in Everyday Life - Coping with Unstructured Time. Journal of Communication, 36(3), 108-123. doi: DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1986.tb01441.x
26.
KubeyRobertLarsonReedCsikszentmihalyiMihaly. (1996). Experience sampling method applications to communication research questions. Journal of communication, 46(2), 99-120.
27.
KujalaSari. (2008). Effective user involvement in product development by improving the analysis of user needs. Behaviour & Information Technology, 27(6), 457-473.
28.
KujalaSariMiron-ShatzTalya. (2013). Emotions, experiences and usability in real-life mobile phone use. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
29.
KunertTibor. (2009). User-centered interaction design patterns for interactive digital television applications: Springer.
30.
KuniavskyMike. (2003). Observing the user experience: a practitioner’s guide to user research: Morgan Kaufmann.
31.
LazarJonathanFengJinjuan HeidiHochheiserHarry. (2010). Research methods in human-computer interaction: Wiley. com.
32.
LewisKateSligoFrankMasseyClaire. (2005). Observe, record, then beyond: Facilitating participant reflection via research diaries. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2(2), 216-229.
33.
NormanDon. (2002). Emotion & design: attractive things work better. interactions, 9(4), 36-42.
34.
O’BrienJonRoddenTomRouncefieldMarkHughesJohn. (1999). At home with the technology: an ethnographic study of a set-top-box trial. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 6(3), 282-308.
35.
ObristMariannaBernhauptReginaBeckElkeTscheligiManfred. (2007). Focusing on elderly: an iTV usability evaluation study with eye-trackingInteractive TV: a Shared Experience (pp. 66-75): Springer.
36.
RiemanJohn. (1993). The diary study: a workplace-oriented research tool to guide laboratory efforts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the INTERACT’93 and CHI’93 conference on Human factors in computing systems.
37.
RubinAlan M. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing patterns and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 27(1), 37-51.
38.
ShapiroDan. (1994). The limits of ethnography: combining social sciences for CSCW. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
39.
TractinskyNoamKatzASIkarDror. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with computers, 13(2), 127-145.
40.
TseklevesEmmanuelWhithamRogerKondoKokoHillAnnette. (2011). Investigating media use and the television user experience in the home. Entertainment computing, 2(3), 151-161.
41.
von Wilamowitz-MoellendorffMHassenzahlMPlatzA. (2006). Dynamics of user experience: How the perceived quality of mobile phones changes over time.
