Best practices for capturing context in user experience studies in the wild

Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, MindTrek 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 91-98

  Roto, Virpi ^a,b   Väätäjä, Heli ^b   Jumisko Pyykkö, Satu ^b   Väänänen Vainio Mattila, Kaisa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

best practices; context characteristics; context of use; context of UX; field studies; mobile context; user experience

Indexed keywords

BEST PRACTICES; CONTEXT CHARACTERISTICS; CONTEXT OF USE; CONTEXT OF UX; FIELD STUDIES; MOBILE CONTEXT; USER EXPERIENCE;

MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84860664366     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2181037.2181054     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. Bradley, N. A. & Dunlop, M, D. (2005) Toward a Multidisciplinary Model of Context to Support Context-Aware Computing. Int. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 20(4) 403-446.
2. Crabtree, A., Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Tennent, P., Chalmers, M., and Brown, B. (2006) Supporting ethnographic studies of ubiquitous computing in the wild. In Proc. Designing interactive Systems, DIS '06. 60-69.
3. Dey, A.K. and Abowd, G.D. (1999). Toward a better understanding of context and context-awareness. GVU Technical Report GIT-GVU-99-22, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology.
4. Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User Experience - a research agenda (Editorial). Behavior & Information Technology, 25(2), pp. 91-97
5. ISO 13407:1999. Human-centered design processes for interactive systems. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Switzerland.
6. ISO 9241-210:2010. Ergonomics of human system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
7. Jokela, T., Väätäjä, H., Koponen, T. (2009) Mobile Journalist Toolkit: A Field Study on Producing News Articles with a Mobile Device. Proc. of MindTrek 2009, Tampere, Finland.
8. Jumisko-Pyykkö, S., Vainio, T. (2010) Framing the Context of Use for Mobile HCI. Int. Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction. 2(4), pp. 1-18.
9. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd Ed. Sage Publications, USA.
10. Roto, V. (2006) Web Browsing on Mobile Phones - Characteristics of User Experience. Doctoral dissertation, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland.
11. Tashakkori A, Teddlie C (2008) Quality of Inferences in Mixed Methods Research: Calling for an Intergrative Framework. In Bergman MM (ed) Advances in Mixed Method Research. Age Publications Ltd.
12. Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Väätäjä, H., Vainio, T. (2009) Opportunities and Challenges of Designing the Service User eXperience (SUX) in Web 2.0. In Saariluoma, P. and Isomäki, H. (Eds.), Future Interaction Design II, Springer, 2009.
13. Vermeeren, A., Law, E., Roto, V., Obrist, M., Hoonhout, J., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2010) User Experience Evaluation Methods: Current State and Development Needs. Proc. NordiCHI 2010, Reykjavik, Island.
14. Baber, C. Evaluating Mobile Human-Computer Interaction, In Lumsden J. (ed.) Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 731-744.
15. Bernhaupt, R., Mihalic, K., Obrist, M. Usability Evaluation Methods for Mobile Applications. In Lumsden J. (ed.) Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 745-757.
16. Blom, J., Chipchase, J., Lehikoinen, J. (2005) Contextual and Cultural Challenges for User Mobility Research. Comm. ACM, July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7, pp. 37-41.
17. Dearden, A., Harrison, M., Wright, P. (2000) Allocation of function: scenarios, context and the economics of effort. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud. 52(2), pp. 289-318.
18. Glascock & Kutzik (2009) Embrace the Chaos, It's Not Noise: Lessons Learned from Non-Traditional Environments. Int. J. Mobile Human-Computer Interaction. 1(2), pp. 22-36.
19. Høegh, R.T., Kjeldskov, J., Skov, M.B., Stage, J. (2008) A Field Laboratory for Evaluating in Situ. In Lumsden, J. (ed): Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 983-997.
20. Isomursu, M., Tähti, M., Väinämö, S., Kuutti, K. (2007) Experimental evaluation of five methods for collecting emotions in field settings with mobile applications. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud., 65(4), pp. 404-418.
21. Jumisko-Pyykkö, S., Hannuksela, M. (2008) Does context matter in quality evaluation of mobile television? Proc. Mobile HCI 2008, pp. 63-72.
22. Kaikkonen, A., Kekäläinen, A., Cankar, M., Kallio, T., and Kankainen, A. (2008) Will laboratory test results be valid in mobile contexts? In Lumsden, J. (ed.): Handbook of Research on User Interface Design and Evaluation for Mobile Technology, 897-909.
23. Kjeldskov J., Skov M. B., Als B. S. and Høegh R. T. (2004) Is it worth the hassle? Exploring the added value of evaluating the usability of context-aware mobile systems in the field. In Proc. Mobile HCI 2004, pp. 61-73.
24. Kjeldskov, J., Stage, J. 2004. New techniques for usability evaluation of mobile systems. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud. 60, pp. 599-620.
25. Leichtenstern et al. EVAL - An Evaluation Component for Mobile Interfaces. In Proc. Mobile HCI 2008.
26. Maguire, M. 2001. Context of use within usability activities. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 55, 4 (Oct. 2001), 453-483.
27. Mihalic, K., Tscheligi, M. 'Divert: Mother in Law' - Representing and Evaluating Social Context on Mobile Devices. In Proc. Mobile HCI 2007.
28. Müller, J. Cheverst, K., Fitton, D., Taylor, N., Paczkowski, O., Krüger, A. (2009) Experiences of Supporting Local and Remote Mobile Phone Interaction in Situated Public Display Deployments. Int. J. Mobile Human-Computer Interaction 1(2), 1-21.
29. Neale, H., Nichols, S. (2001)Theme-based content analysis: a flexible method for virtual environment evaluation. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud. 55(2), 167-189.
30. Oulasvirta, A., Tamminen, S., Roto, V., Kuorelahti, J. (2005) Interaction in 4-second Bursts: The Fragmented Nature of Attentional Resources in Mobile HCI. Proc. CHI2005.
31. Ross, T., Burnett, G. (2001) Evaluating the human-machine interface to vehicle navigation systems as an example of ubiquitous computing. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud. 55(4), 661-674.
32. Sherwood, S., Reeves, S., Maitland, J., Morrison, A. and Chalmers, M. (2009) Adapting Evaluation to Study Behaviour in Context. Int. J. Mobile Human-Computer Interaction 1(2), 37-55.
33. Siek, K. et al. (2009) Advances in Evaluating Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems. Special issue preface, IJMHCI 1(2).
34. Stoica, A., Fiotakis, G., Raptis, D., Papadimitriou, I., Komis, V. Avouris, N. (2008) Field Evaluation of Collaborative Mobile Applications. In Lumsden J. (ed.) Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 997-1013.
35. Streefkerk, J.W., van Esch-Bussemakers, M.P., Neerinex, M.A., Looije, R. (2008) Evaluating Context-Aware Mobile Interfaces for Professionals. In Lumsden J. (ed.) Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 759-779.
36. Turnell, M., de Queiroz, J., de Sousa Ferreira, D. (2008) Multilayered Approach to Evaluate Mobile user Interfaces. In Lumsden J. (ed.) Handbook of research on user interface design and evaluation of mobile technology, 847-862.
37. Vuolle, M., Kallio, T., Kulju, M., Tiainen, M., Vainio, T., Wigelius, H. (2008) Developing a Questionnaire for Measuring Mobile Business Service Experience. In Proc. MobileHCI 2008, 2-5 September, 2008, Amsterdam.
38. Zhang, D. & Adipat, B. (2005) Challenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications. Int. J. Human-Comp. Stud. 18(3) 293-30.