Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 10, Issue 3 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2022)
Iran J Ergon 2022, 10(3): 181-189 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.TABRIZU.REC.1400.078
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Adabi N, Sabourimoghaddam H, Bakhsheepour Roodsari A. Measuring User's Emotional Experience in Two Tools Using an Integrated Method Based on Task Analysis. Iran J Ergon 2022; 10 (3) :181-189
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-918-en.html
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-918-en.html
Measuring User's Emotional Experience in Two Tools Using an Integrated Method Based on Task Analysis
1- Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, School of Education and Psychology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
2- Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, School of Education and Psychology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran , sabouri-h@tabrizu.ac.ir
3- Department of Psychology, School of Education and Psychology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
2- Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, School of Education and Psychology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran , sabouri-h@tabrizu.ac.ir
3- Department of Psychology, School of Education and Psychology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract: (2449 Views)
Objectives: Human factors are critical in the design and development of various products, but wideness and unclarity of different aspects of these factors make it difficult to extract demands of users. Studying emotional aspects of users' behavior in interaction with products, as well as interviewing them, is considered as an efficient tool in extracting design demands. This study aims to integrate the application of task analysis and the measuring of emotional aspects to determine the users’ emotional states in the different stages; and therefore extract the user satisfaction criteria.
Methods: This research has a descriptive/ exploratory approach. In this practical study, the use of two everyday tools for chopping onions is analyzed. 20 users of these tools were non-randomly selected to participate in the test and interview. Users performed the task with each tool, and the process was recorded by a camera. After performing the task, subjects completed self-assessment questionnaire and then, an interview was conducted about their experience of the tools usage. Parametric t test was used to evaluate results of the questionnaire and compare averages.
Results: Findings of the emotional questionnaire showed that the emotional states of people in different stages of task are significantly different from each other. The determined emotional states, showed the weaknesses and the advantages of the tools studied. By analyzing videos, interviews and surveys, users' demands were extracted. The extracted features were categorized based on the work steps.
Conclusion: Using this method can reveal precise details of users’ needs concerning product category, which can be used as a suitable tool for designers and researchers in the field of user experience.
Methods: This research has a descriptive/ exploratory approach. In this practical study, the use of two everyday tools for chopping onions is analyzed. 20 users of these tools were non-randomly selected to participate in the test and interview. Users performed the task with each tool, and the process was recorded by a camera. After performing the task, subjects completed self-assessment questionnaire and then, an interview was conducted about their experience of the tools usage. Parametric t test was used to evaluate results of the questionnaire and compare averages.
Results: Findings of the emotional questionnaire showed that the emotional states of people in different stages of task are significantly different from each other. The determined emotional states, showed the weaknesses and the advantages of the tools studied. By analyzing videos, interviews and surveys, users' demands were extracted. The extracted features were categorized based on the work steps.
Conclusion: Using this method can reveal precise details of users’ needs concerning product category, which can be used as a suitable tool for designers and researchers in the field of user experience.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Ergonomics in Design
Received: 2022/10/21 | Accepted: 2022/12/22 | ePublished: 2022/12/22
Received: 2022/10/21 | Accepted: 2022/12/22 | ePublished: 2022/12/22
References
1. International Organization for Standardization. Ergonomics of human-system interaction: Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2010.
2. Bouchard C, Bongard-Blanchy K. Dimensions of user experience-from the product design perspective. JIPS. 2015;3. [DOI]
3. Robert JM, Lesage A. Designing and evaluating user experience. In: Boy GA, editor. The handbook of human-machine interaction. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press; 2017. p. 321-38.
4. Masmoudi S, Dai DY, Naceur A. Attention, representation, and human performance: Integration of cognition, emotion, and motivation. London, UK: Psychology Press; 2012.
5. Hassenzahl M. The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product. Funology. 2003:31-42. [DOI]
6. Scherer KR. What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Soc Sci Inf. 2005;44(4):695-729. [DOI]
7. Krippendorff K. The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press; 2005.
8. Berni A, Borgianni Y. Making order in user experience research to support its application in design and beyond. Appl Sci. 2021;11(5):6981. [DOI]
9. Law EL, Van Schaik P, Roto V. Attitudes towards user experience (UX) measurement. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2014;72(6):526-41. [DOI]
10. Cai H, Lin Y. Modeling of operators' emotion and task performance in a virtual driving environment. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2011;69(9):571-86. [DOI]
11. Yang X, Wang R, Tang C, Luo L, Mo X. Emotional design for smart product-service system: A case study on smart beds. J Clean Prod 2021;298:126823. [DOI]
12. Iflaifel MH, Lim R, Crowley C, Ryan K, Greco F. Detailed analysis of 'work as imagined' in the use of intravenous insulin infusions in a hospital: a hierarchical task analysis. BMJ Open. 2021;11(3):e041848. [DOI] [PubMed]
13. Hasheminejad N, Choobineh A, Mostafavi R, Tahernejad S, Rostami M. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders, ergonomics risk assessment and implementation of participatory ergonomics program for pistachio farm workers. Med Lav. 2021;112(4):292-305. [DOI] [PubMed]
14. Hoffman RR, Militello LG. Perspectives on cognitive task analysis: Historical origins and modern communities of practice. London, UK: Psychology Press; 2008.
15. Wang Z, Ho SB, Cambria E. A review of emotion sensing: categorization models and algorithms. Multimedia Tools and Applications. 2020;79(47):35553-82. [DOI]
16. Crowson A, Wilkinson M, Wagner RB, Wilson R, Gillan D. Emotion task analysis: Proposing a tool for the assessment of emotional components in a task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. 2020;64(1):1242-6). [DOI]
17. Danaeifard H, Alvani M, Azar A. Qualitative research methodology in management: a comprehensive approach [in Persian]. Tehran, Iran: Saffar Ishraqi Publications; 2004.
18. Sonderegger A, Uebelbacher A, Sauer J. The UX construct-does the usage context influence the outcome of user experience evaluations? Proceeding of the IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction; 2019 Sep; Cham. [DOI]
19. Nabizadeh Chianeh G, Vahedi S, Rostami M, Nazari MA. Validity and reliability of self-assessment manikin [in Persian]. RPH. 2012;6(2):52-61. [DOI]
20. Borgianni Y, Maccioni L. Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research. AIEDAM. 2020;34(2):248-85. [DOI]
21. Zhou F, Ji Y, Jiao RJ. Emotional design. In: Salvendy G, Karwowski W, editors. Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. 5th ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2021. p. 236-51.
22. Gillan DJ. Five questions concerning task analysis. In: Wilson MA, Bennett W, Gibson, SG, Alliger GM, editors. The handbook of work analysis. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge; 2013: p. 234-246.
23. Sauer J, Sonderegger A. Visual aesthetics and user experience: A multiple-session experiment. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2022;165:102837. [DOI]
24. Berghman M, Hekkert P. Towards a unified model of aesthetic pleasure in design. New Ideas Psychol. 2017;47:136-44. [DOI]
25. Alonso-García M, Pardo-Vicente MÁ, Rodríguez-Parada L, Moreno Nieto D. Do products respond to user desires? A case study. Errors and successes in the design process, under the umbrella of emotional design. Symmetry. 2020;12(8):1350. [DOI]
26. Bettiga D, Bianchi AM, Lamberti L, Noci G. Consumers emotional responses to functional and hedonic products: a neuroscience research. Front Psychol. 2020;11:559779. [DOI] [PubMed]
27. Gaur L, Chandra S. Product semantics: The emotional design language. Proceeding of the International Conference on Research into Design; 2021 Jan 7; Singapore. [DOI]
28. Ghasemi F, Hasini M, Ahmadi M, Rahmiani-IranShahi M. The relationship between working posture and anthropometric compatibility with workstations: a case study among sewing operators [in Persian]. Iran J Ergon. 2021;8(4):15-30. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Copyright Policy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
