A French version of the AttrakDiff scale: Translation and validation study of a user experience assessment tool;Création et validation d'une version française du questionnaire AttrakDiff pour l’évaluation de l'expérience utilisateur des systèmes interactifs

Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee

Volumn 65, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 239-252

  Lallemand, C ^a,b   Koenig, V ^a   Gronier, G ^b   Martin, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^b LUXEMBOURG INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Luxembourg)

Author keywords

AttrakDiff scale; Human computer interaction; Interactive systems evaluation; Questionnaire; Transcultural validation process; User experience; UX

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941248025     PISSN: 11629088     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erap.2015.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Anastasi, A., Psychological testing. 4th edition, 1976, MacMillan, New York.
2. Bem, D.J., Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review 74:3 (1967), 183–200, 10.1037/h0024835.
3. Brislin, R.W., Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. Triandis, H.C., Berry, J.W., (eds.) Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, 1, 1980, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 389–444.
4. Brislin, R.W., The wording and translation of research instruments. Lonner, W.J., Berry, J.W., (eds.) Field methods in cross-cultural research, 1986, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 137–164.
5. Brislin, R.W., Lonner, W.J., Thorndike, R.M., Cross-cultural research methods. 1973, Wiley, New York.
6. Brooke, J., SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, A.L., (eds.) Usability evaluation in industry, 1996, Taylor and Francis, London.
7. Cattell, R.B., The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1 (1966), 245–276, 10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.
8. Chang, A.M., Chau, J.P., Holroyd, E., Translation of questionnaires and issues of equivalence. Journal of Advanced Nursing 29:2 (1999), 316–322.
9. Chin, J.P., Diehl, V.A., Norman, K.L., Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, New York: ACM/SIGCHI, 1988, 213–218.
10. Christophersen, T., Konradt, U., Reliability, validity, and sensitivity of a single-item measure of online store usability. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69 (2011), 269–280, 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.10.005.
11. Christou, G., A comparison between experiences and inexperienced video games players’ perceptions. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences, 3(15), 2013, 10.1186/2192-1962-3-15.
12. Desmet, P.M.A., Hekkert, P., Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design 1 (2007), 57–66.
13. Eimler, S., von der Pütten, A., Schächtle, U., Carstens, L., Krämer, N., Following the white rabbit – a robot rabbit as vocabulary trainer for beginners of English. Leitner, G., Hitz, M., Holzinger, A., (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 6389, 2010, HCI in work and learning, life and leisure, 322–339, 10.1007/978-3-642-16607-5_22.
14. Festinger, L., A theory of cognitive dissonance. 1957, Stanford University Press, California.
15. Grimm, L.G., Yarnold, P.R., Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. 1995, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
16. Grün, C., Gerken, J., Jetter, H.-C., Koenig, W., Reiterer, H., MedioVis – A user-centred library metadata browser. Rauber, A., et al. (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 3652, 2005, Research and advanced technology for digital libraries, 174–185, 10.1007/11551362_16.
17. Gudmundsson, E., Guidelines for translating and adapting psychological instruments. Nordic Psychology 61:2 (2009), 29–45, 10.1027/1901-2276.61.2.29.
18. Hambleton, R., The next generation of the ITC test translation and adaptation guidelines. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 17 (2001), 164–172, 10.1027/1015-5759.17.3.164.
19. Hambleton, R.K., Patsula, L., Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology 1 (1999), 1–30.
20. Harbich, S., Auer, S., The influence of hedonic quality on usability questionnaires. Costabile, M.F., Paternò F., (eds.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3585, 2005, 1129–1133, 10.1007/11555261_121.
21. Hartson, R., Pyla, P., The UX book: Process and guidelines for ensuring a quality user experience. 2012, Morgan Kaufmann, Waltham, MD.
22. Hassenzahl, M., The thing and I: Understanding the relationship between user and product. Blyth, M.A., Monk, A.F., Overbeeke, K., Wright, P.C., (eds.) Human-computer interaction series, 3, 2003, Funology: From usability to enjoyment, 31–42, 10.1007/1-4020-2967-5_4.
23. Hassenzahl, M., The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Human-Computer Interaction 19 (2004), 319–349, 10.1207/s15327051hci1904_2.
24. Hassenzahl, M., User Experience (UX): Towards an experiential perspective on product quality. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the Association Francophone d'Interaction Homme-Machine, New York, NY: ACM, 2008, 11–15, 10.1145/1512714.1512717.
25. Hassenzahl, M., Experience design: Technology for all the right reasons. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 3:1 (2010), 1–95, 10.2200/S00261ED1V01Y201003HCI008.
26. Hassenzahl, M., Experiences before things: A primer for the (yet) unconvinced. CHI’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. 2013, ACM, New York, NY, 2059–2068, 10.1145/2468356.2468724.
27. Hassenzahl, M., Beu, A., Burmester, M., Engineering joy. IEEE Software 18:1 (2001), 70–76, 10.1109/52.903170.
28. Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., Koller, F., AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. Ziegler, J., Szwillus, G., (eds.) Mensch & Computer 2003. Interaktion in Bewegung, 2003, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, Germany, 187–196, 10.1007/978-3-322-80058-9_19.
29. Hassenzahl, M., Monk, A., The inference of perceived usability from beauty. Human-Computer Interaction 25:3 (2010), 235–260, 10.1080/07370024.2010.500139.
30. Hassenzahl, M., Platz, A., Burmester, M., Lehner, K., Hedonic and ergonomic quality aspects determine a software's appeal. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, New York, NY: ACM, 2000, 201–208, 10.1145/332040.332432.
31. Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N., User experience – a research agenda. Behavior & Information Technology 25 (2006), 91–97, 10.1080/01449290500330331.
32. Hilton, A., Skrutkowski, M., Translating instruments into other languages: Development and testing processes. Cancer Nursing 25:1 (2002), 1–7.
33. Holm, J., Lehtiniemi, A., A virtual world prototype for interacting with a music collection. Ozok, A., Zaphiris, P., (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 6778, 2011, Online Communities and Social Computing, 326–335, 10.1007/978-3-642-21796-8_35.
34. International Test Commission, Guidelines for translating and adapting tests. 2010 [http://www.intestcom.org].
35. International Organization for Standardization, ISO 9241-210: 2010: Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. 2010, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
36. Isleifsdottir, J., Larusdottir, M., Measuring the user experience of a task oriented software. Law, E., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th COST294-MAUSE open workshop on valid useful user experience measurement, 2008, Reykjavik, Iceland, 97–101.
37. Kirakowski, J., Corbett, M., SUMI: The software usability measurement inventory. British Journal of Educational Technology 24 (1993), 210–212.
38. Klaassen, R., Akker op den, R., Lavrysen, T., van Wissen, S., User preferences for multi-device context-aware feedback in a digital coaching system. Journal of Multimodal User Interfaces 7:3 (2013), 247–267, 10.1007/s12193-013-0125-0.
39. Lallemand, C., Gronier, G., Koenig, V., User experience: A concept without consensus? Exploring practitioners’ perspectives through an international survey. Computers in Human Behavior 43 (2015), 35–48, 10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.048.
40. Lankes, M., Bernhaupt, R., Tscheligi, M., Evaluating user experience factors using experiments: Expressive ARTIfiCIAL FACES EMBEDDED IN CONTEXTS. Bernhaupt, R., (eds.) Human-computer interaction series. Evaluating user experience in games, 2010, Springer, London, 10.1007/978-1-84882-963-3_10.
41. Laugwitz, B., Held, T., Schrepp, M., Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire. Holzinger, A., (eds.) HCI and usability for education and work USAB 2008, LNCS, 5298, 2008, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 63–76.
42. Law, E., Roto, V., Hassenzahl, M., Vermeeren, A., Kort, J., Understanding, scoping and defining UX: A survey approach. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY: ACM, 2009, 10.1145/1518701.1518813.
43. Law, E.C., Van Schaik, P., Roto, V., Attitudes towards user experience (UX) measurement. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 72:6 (2013), 526–541, 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.09.006i.
44. Leuteritz, J.-P., Widlroither, H., Klüh, M., Multi-level validation of the isometrics questionnaire based on qualitative and quantitative data obtained from a conventional usability test. Jacko, J.A., (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 5610, 2009, Human-Computer Interaction. New trends, 304–313, 10.1007/978-3-642-02574-7_34.
45. Lund, A.M., Measuring usability with the USE questionnaire. Usability & User Experience (STC SIG Newsletter), 8, 2001, 2 Retrieved from http://www.stcsig.org/usability/newsletter/0110_measuring_with_use.html.
46. Maguire, M., Methods to support human-centred design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 55:4 (2001), 587–634.
47. Moshagen, M., Thielsch, M.T., Facets of visual aesthetics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 68:10 (2010), 689–709, 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.05.006.
48. Nichols, A.L., Webster, G.D., The single-item need to belong scale. Personality and Individual Differences 55:2 (2013), 189–192, 10.1016/j.paid.2013.02.018.
49. Nielsen, J., Usability engineering. 1993, AP Professional, New York.
50. Norman, D., Miller, J., Henderson, A., What you see, some of what's in the future, and how we go about doing it: HI at apple computer. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY: ACM, 1995.
51. Nunnally, J.C., Introduction to psychological measurement. 1970, McGraw-Hill, New York.
52. Nunnally, J.C., Psychometric theory. 1978, McGraw-Hill, New York.
53. Osgood, C.E., Suci, C.J., Tannenbaum, G.H., The measurement of meaning. 1957, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
54. Peedu, G., Enhancing public service user experience in information society (master's thesis)., 2011, Tallinn University, Institute of Informatics, Estonia Retrieved from: www.cs.tlu.ee/teemaderegister/get_file.php?id=108.
55. Pine, B.J., Gilmore, J.H., Welcome to the experience economy: Work is theatre & every business a stage. Harvard Business Review, 1998.
56. Raita, E., Oulasvirta, A., Too good to be bad: Favorable product expectations boost subjective usability ratings. Interacting with Computers 23 (2011), 363–371, 10.1016/j.intcom.2011.04.002.
57. Roto, V., Law, E., Vermeeren, A., Hoonhout, J., User experience white paper: Bringing clarity to the concept of user experience. 2011, Result from Dagstuhl Seminar on Demarcating User Experience, Sept. 15–18, 2010, Finland http://www.allaboutux.org/uxwhitepaper.
58. Russell, J.A., Weiss, A., Mendelsohn, G., Affect grid: A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57:3 (1989), 493–502.
59. Sauro, J., Dumas, J., Comparison of three one-question, post-task usability questionnaires. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, New York, NY: ACM, 2009, 1599–1608, 10.1145/1518701.1518946.
60. Scherer, K.R., What are emotions? And how can they be measured?. Social Science Information 44:4 (2005), 693–727, 10.1177/0539018405058216.
61. Sheldon, K.M., Elliot, A.J., Kim, Y., Kasser, T., What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89 (2001), 325–339, 10.1037//O022-3514.80.2.325.
62. Schrepp, M., Held, T., Laugwitz, B., The influence of hedonic quality on the attractiveness of user interfaces of business management software. Interacting with Computers 18:5 (2006), 1055–1069.
63. Spielberger, C.D., Sharma, S., Cross-cultural measurement of anxiety. Spielberger, C.D., Diaz-Guerrero, R., (eds.) Cross-cultural anxiety, 1976, Hemisphere, Washington, 13–25.
64. Tractinsky, N., Katz, A., Ikar, D., What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers 13:2 (2000), 127–145, 10.1016/S0953-5438(00)00031-X.
65. Tuch, A., Trusell, R., Hornbæk, K., Analyzing users’ narratives to understand experience with interactive products. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Paris, France: ACM, 2013, 2079–2088, 10.1145/2470654.2481285.
66. Vallerand, R.J., Vers une méthodologie de validation transculturelle de questionnaires psychologiques : Implications pour la recherche en langue française. Psychologie Canadienne 30:4 (1989), 662–689.
67. Van Boven, L., Gilovich, T., To do or to have? That is the question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85 (2003), 1193–1202, 10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1193.
68. Van de Vijver, F.J.R., Hambleton, R.K., Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist 1 (1996), 89–99.
69. Van de Vijver, F.J.R., Poortinga, Y.H., Towards an integrated analysis of bias in cross-cultural assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 13 (1997), 29–37.
70. Van de Vijver, F., Tanzer, N.K., Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée – European Review of Applied Psychology 54 (2004), 119–135, 10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004.
71. Van Schaik, P., Ling, J., Modelling user experience with web sites: Usability, hedonic value, beauty and goodness. Interacting with Computers 20 (2008), 419–432, 10.1016/j.intcom.2008.03.001.
72. Vermeeren, A., Law, E., Roto, V., Obrist, M., Hoonhout, J., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., User experience evaluation methods: Current state and development needs. Proceedings of the 6th Nordic conference on human-computer interaction: extending boundaries, New York, NY: ACM Press, 2010, 10.1145/1868914.1868973.
73. Wanous, J.P., Hudy, M.J., Single-item reliability: A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods 4 (2001), 361–375, 10.1177/109442810144003.
74. Wechsung, I., Engelbrecht, K.-P., Schaffer, S., Seebode, J., Metze, F., Möller, S., Usability evaluation of multimodal interfaces: Is the whole the sum of its parts?. Jacko, J.A., (eds.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5611, 2009, Human-computer interaction. Novel interaction methods and techniques, 113–119, 10.1007/978-3-642-02577-8_13.
75. Wechsung, I., Naumann, A.B., Evaluation methods for multimodal systems: A comparison of standardized usability questionnaires. André E., et al. (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 5078, 2008, Perception in Multimodal Dialog Systems, 276–284, 10.1007/978-3-540-69369-7_32.
76. Zwinderman, M., Leenheer, R., Shirzad, A., Chupriyanov, N., Veugen, G., Zhang, B., et al. Using video prototypes for evaluating design concepts with users: A comparison to usability testing. Kotzé P., et al. (eds.) Lecture notes in computer science, 8118, 2013, 774–781, 10.1007/978-3-642-40480-1_55.