The influence of product aesthetics and user state in usability testing

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 787-796

  Sauer, Juergen ^a   Sonderegger, Andreas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Perceived usability; Product aesthetics; Product attractiveness; Usability test; User performance

Indexed keywords

PERCEIVED USABILITY; PRODUCT AESTHETICS; PRODUCT ATTRACTIVENESS; USABILITY TESTS; USER PERFORMANCE;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

USABILITY ENGINEERING;

EID: 84855681269     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2010.503352     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Ben-Bassat, T., Meyer, J., and Tractinsky, N., 2006. Economic and subjective measures of the perceived value of aesthetics and usability. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 13 (2), 210-234. (Pubitemid 44546467)
2. Chang, H.C., Lai, H.H., and Chang, Y.M., 2007. A measurement scale for evaluating the attractiveness of a passenger car form aimed at young consumers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37 (1), 21-30.
3. Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., and Clarkson, P.J., 2004. Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25 (6), 547-577.
4. Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1997. Finding flow: the psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
5. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., and Walster, E., 1972. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24 (3), 285-290.
6. Hall, R.R., 1999. Usability and product design: a case study. In: P. Jordan and W.S. Green, eds. Human factors in product design. London: Taylor & Francis, 85-91.
7. Hassenzahl, M. and Tractinsky, N., 2006. User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour and Information Technology, 25, 91-97. (Pubitemid 43065340)
8. Heckert, P., Snelders, H.M.J.J., and van Wieringen, P.C.W., 2003. Most advanced, yet acceptable: typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 111-124. (Pubitemid 37189160)
9. Hockey, G.R.J., 1997. Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under stress and high workload: a cognitive energetical framework. Biological Psychology, 45, 73-93.
10. Jones, F., et al., 2005. Adherence to an exercise prescription scheme: the role of expectations, self-efficacy, stage of change and psychological well-being. British Journal of Health Psychology, 10 (3), 359-378. (Pubitemid 41329406)
11. Klein, J., Moon, Y., and Picard, R.W., 2002. This computer responds to user frustration: theory, design, and results. Interacting with Computers, 14 (2), 119-140. (Pubitemid 34199155)
12. Kurosu, M. and Kashimura, K., 1995. Apparent usability vs. inherent usability: experimental analysis on the determinants of the apparent usability. In: Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems, 7-11 May 1995, Denver, USA. New York: ACM, 292-293.
13. Lavie, T. and Tractinsky, N., 2004. Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60 (3), 269-298.
14. Lindgaard, G., 2007. Aesthetics, visual appeal, usability, and user satisfaction: what do the user's eyes tell the user's brain. Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 5, 1-16.
15. Lindgaard, G., et al., 2006. Attention web designers: you have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour and Information Technology, 25, 115-126. (Pubitemid 43065342)
16. Leder, H., et al., 2004. A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgements. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508.
17. Lewis, J.R., 1995. IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaire: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7 (1), 57-78.
18. Lewis, J.R., 2002. Psychometric evaluation of the PSSUQ: using data from five years of usability studies. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 14 (3-4), 463-488. (Pubitemid 36611301)
19. Lewis, J.R., 2006. Usability testing. In: G. Salvendy, ed. Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. New York: John Wiley, 1275-1316.
20. Ngo, D.C.L., Teo, L.S., and Byrne, J.G., 2003. Modelling interface aesthetics. Information Sciences, 152, 25-46.
21. Nielsen, J., 1990. Paper versus computer implementations as mockup scenarios for heuristic evaluation. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 3rd international conference on human-computer interaction, 27-31 August 1990, Cambridge, UK. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing, 315-320.
22. Nielsen, J. and Levy, J., 1994. Measuring usability - preference vs. performance. Communications of the ACM, 31 (4), 66-75.
23. Nilsson, J. and Siponen, J., 2005. Challenging the HCI concept of fidelity by positioning Ozlab prototypes. In: Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on information systems development. New York: Springer, 349-360.
24. Norman, D.A., 2004. Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
25. O'Donnell, R.D. and Eggemeier, F.T., 1986. Workload assessment methodology. In: K.R. Boff, L. Kaufman, and J.P. Thomas, eds. Handbook of perception and human performance. New York: Wiley, 2 (42), 1-49.
26. Partala, T. and Surakka, V., 2004. The effects of affective interventions in human-computer interaction. Interacting with Computers, 16 (2), 295-309.
27. Picard, R.W. and Klein, J., 2002. Computers that recognise and respond to user emotion: theoretical and practical implications. Interacting with Computers, 14 (2), 141-169. (Pubitemid 34199156)
28. Postrel, V., 2003. The substance of style: how the rise of aesthetic value is remarking commerce, culture, and consciousness. New York: Harper Collins.
29. Sauer, J., Franke, H., and Ruttinger, B., 2008. Designing interactive consumer products: utility of low-fidelity prototypes and effectiveness of enhanced control labelling. Applied Ergonomics, 39, 71-85. (Pubitemid 47525496)
30. Sauer, J., Seibel, K., and Ruttinger, B., 2010. The influence of user expertise and prototype fidelity in usability tests. Applied Ergonomics, 41, 130-140.
31. Sauer, J. and Sonderegger, A., 2009. The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion. Applied Ergonomics, 40, 670-677.
32. Schenkman, B.N. and Jonsson, F.U., 2000. Aesthetics and preferences of web pages. Behavior and Information Technology, 19 (5), 367-377. (Pubitemid 35394255)
33. Sonderegger, A. and Sauer, J., 2009. The influence of laboratory set-up in usability tests: effects on user performance, subjective ratings and physiological measures. Ergonomics, 52, 1350-1361.
34. Sonderegger, A. and Sauer, J., 2010. The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: effects on user performance and perceived usability. Applied Ergonomics, 41, 403-410.
35. Thuring, M. and Mahlke, S., 2007. Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human-technology interaction. International Journal of Psychology, 42, 253-264.
36. Tractinsky, N., 1997. Aesthetics and apparent usability: empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 22-27 March, 1997, Atlanta, USA. New York: ACM, 115-122.
37. Tractinsky, N., Katz, A.S., and Ikar, D., 2000. What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13 (2), 127-145. (Pubitemid 32034759)
38. Tzou, R.C. and Lu, H.P., 2009. Exploring the emotional, aesthetic, and ergonomic facets of innovative product on fashion technology acceptance model. Behaviour and Information Technology, 28, 311-322.
39. Virzi, R.A., Sokolov, J.L., and Karis, D., 1996. Usability problem identification using both low- and high-fidelity prototypes. In: Conference proceedings on human factors in computing systems: CHI 96. New York: ACM, 236-243.
40. Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E., and Hudy, M.J., 1997. Overall job satisfaction: how good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (2), 247-252.