Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

UX STRAT 2016 - Ensuring Validity in Strategic UX Research Methods

2 481 vues

Publié le

Conference presented at the UX Strat Europe 2016 conference in Amsterdam by Dr. Carine Lallemand (University of Luxembourg).

Abstract:
While conducting UX research, we make several conclusions that will in turn provide the foundation for our UX strategy. But what if these inferences happen to be wrong, based on invalid findings and false beliefs? How critically would this impact your organization and projects? How can you safeguard a UX strategy by ensuring the quality of research conclusions?
There might be numerous threats to validity in UX research, some of which might depend on the method used or the way it is used. A method is only a guide to action that needs to be configured, adapted, and complemented to match specific project requirements. To be successful, it is essential to ensure validity in strategic UX research methods. Failing to do so is taking the risk to base strategic decisions on false beliefs. In this talk, we will therefore see how to tackle validity issues and make the most out of UX research to stand out from the crowd by delivering value and differentiation. Through the presentation of validated cutting edge UX methods and business cases, you will be able to spot opportunities for improvement in your UX strategy!

Publié dans : Design
  • Soyez le premier à commenter

UX STRAT 2016 - Ensuring Validity in Strategic UX Research Methods

  1. 1. Ensuring Validity in Strategic UX Research Methods Dr. Carine Lallemand University of Luxembourg @carilallUX STRAT Europe 2016
  2. 2. 01 WHO AM I? CARINE LALLEMAND « I DESIGN, ADAPT AND VALIDATE UX RESEARCH METHODS » Carine Lallemand Guillaume Gronier Méthodes de design 30 MÉTHODES FONDAMENTALES POUR CONCEVOIR ET ÉVALUER LES SYSTÈMES INTERACTIFS DESIGN 32€ ConceptionNordCompo DESIGN Articulant théorie et pratique, cet ouvrage présente 30 fiches méthodologiques couvrant l’essentiel du design UX et de l’ergonomie des interactions homme-machine (IHM). Vous serez guidé pas à pas à travers les étapes de réalisation de chaque méthode et accompagné pour prendre les décisions les plus adaptées à votre projet. Chaque fiche méthode intègre égale- ment une partie théorique et des illustrations concrètes pour faciliter la compréhension. Véritable portfolio théorique et méthodologique, cet ouvrage est un guide indispensable à toute personne impliquée dans la conception de systèmes interactifs. Professionnels, chefs de projets, étudiants, enseignants et chercheurs y trouveront de précieuses ressources pour mener à bien leurs projets. Grâce aux méthodes d’UX design, créez des produits et des services qui attirent, qui captivent, qui enchantent et inspirent pour améliorer la vie de ceux qui les utilisent ! AU SOMMAIRE Introduction au design UX ⍟ Planification ⍟ Définition du projet ⍟ Recrute- ment des utilisateurs ⍟ Déontologie et éthique ⍟ Exploration ⍟ Entretien ⍟ Focus group ⍟ Observation ⍟ Questionnaire exploratoire ⍟ Sondes culturelles ⍟ Idéation ⍟ Brainstorming ⍟ Cartes d’idéation ⍟ Design studio ⍟ Experience maps ⍟ Personas ⍟ Techniques génératives ⍟ Génération ⍟ Design persuasif ⍟ Gamification ⍟ Iconographie ⍟ Maquettage ⍟ Storyboarding ⍟ Tri de cartes ⍟ Évaluation ⍟ Complétion de phrases ⍟ Courbes d’éva- luation UX ⍟ Échelles d’utilisabilité ⍟ Échelles UX ⍟ Éva- luation des émotions ⍟ Évaluation experte ⍟ Inspection cognitive ⍟ Journal de bord UX ⍟ Test des 5 secondes ⍟ Tests utilisateurs CodeG14143 ISBN978-2-212-14143-6 « Aucun ouvrage francophone ne rassemble autant de savoir-faire ! Simple, pratique et pédagogique, c’est LE guide essentiel de l’UX au quotidien. » Corinne Leulier, Psychologue - Ergonome, directrice UX chez Klee Group « Ergonomie, psychologie, ingénierie, design, sociologie, ethnographie… Ce livre est une formidable proposition pragmatique, claire et actualisée des méthodes pour la conception et l’évaluation de l’expérience utilisateur ! » Julien Kahn, responsable pôle ergonomie chez Orange Chercheur à l’université de Luxembourg, Carine Lallemand est spécialisée dans les méthodes de conception et d’évaluation de l’expérience utilisateur (UX). Impliquée depuis 2010 dans l’association FLUPA, elle est également conférencière et enseigne l’UX design. Guillaume Gronier est chercheur ergo- nome au Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology. Ses principales activités portent sur l’amélioration de l’expérience utilisateur, l’acceptation technologique et l’implication des utilisateurs dans le processus de conception. Il est l’un des fondateurs de l’association FLUPA. Méthodes de design UX UX CarineLallemand GuillaumeGronierMéthodesdedesignUX Préface d’Alain Robillard-Bastien FORMER VICE- PRESIDENT CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER RESEARCHER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG @CARILALL
  3. 3. 01 WE NEED TO BASE STRATEGIC DECISIONS ON VALID FINDINGS
  4. 4. 01 COLLECTING VALID AND RELIABLE DATA? —> VALID & RELIABLE —> CONTEXTUALIZED & DYNAMIC Asking SIRI? Making a good guess? On-site live wind measurement Meteorological information provided by official services
  5. 5. How can you safeguard a UX strategy by ensuring the quality of research conclusions? 
  6. 6. Whenever we measure or observe we should be concerned with whether we are measuring what we intend to measure or with how our observations are influenced by the circumstances in which they are made
  7. 7. © Adam Cooper (2014) UNDERSTANDING VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY Validity: are we measuring what we intend to measure? Reliability: how stable or constant is our measure? UX UX UX UX
  8. 8. 01 WORLD IA DAY 2016 PRESENTATION TITLE HERE <STRATEGIC THINKING >Doing the right things = Using the right methods TACTICAL THINKING Doing things right = Using the methods right
  9. 9. 01 WORLD IA DAY 2016 Some kind of illustration or image? HEADER OPTION SUB HEAD OR SHORT DESCRIPTION Some kind of explanatory text, reference or footnote can go here and wrap to two lines, if needed. USING THE RIGHT METHODS 1 © UX Booth (2016)
  10. 10. « Strangely, while I find the proposition to consider the experience before the thing quite a radical change, many practitioners and academics of HCI happily embrace experience – however, without changing much in their approach. » -Prof. Marc Hassenzahl (2013)
  11. 11. The nature and complexity of UX involves a deep change in the methods we use UX is highly dynamic The memory of an experience matters more than the experience itself UX is highly contextual UX is holistic1 2 3 4 5 UX is about emotions and psychological needs
  12. 12. UX is holistic Thüring & Mahlke, 2007 A system’s perceived attractiveness is based on the perception of its pragmatic and hedonic qualities System User Context Interaction characteristics Perception of non-instrumental qualities Emotions Perception of instrumental qualities Components of User Experience Consequences overall evaluation, acceptance, intention to use, choice of alternatives 1
  13. 13. System User Context Interaction characteristics Perception of non-instrumental qualities Emotions Perception of instrumental qualities Components of User Experience Consequences overall evaluation, acceptance, intention to use, choice of alternatives Usability scales (SUS, QUIS, SUMI, WAMMI, etc) established usability questionnaires focus on pragmatic aspects only… this is not enough! 1 UX is holistic Thüring & Mahlke, 2007
  14. 14. We need to assess both pragmatic and hedonic perceived qualities of a system AttrakDiff scale (Hassenzahl et al., 2003) User Experience Questionnaire (Laugwitz et al., 2008) meCUE scale (Minge & Riedel, 2013) 1 Using standardized and validated UX scales
  15. 15. The AttrakDiff scale: a standardized UX assessment tool 28 items (word pairs) divided into four subscales: • Pragmatic qualities • Hedonic qualities - stimulation • Hedonic qualities - identification • Attractiveness • Single evaluation • Comparison product A - product B • Comparison Before - After An abridged version (10 items) Portfolio of results (comparison A vs. B) (Hassenzahl et al., 2003)
  16. 16. UX is highly contextual Context User System Social context Technical context Temporal context Task context Physical context Time 2
  17. 17. user testing in a controlled environment expert evaluation traditional evaluation methods assess UX in an artificial environment Context User System Time 2 UX is highly contextual
  18. 18. How does UX alter laboratory evaluation? Study conducted in 2015 (Lallemand et al., 2015) Experiment involving 70 users, who were asked to evaluate their UX with two systems Research objective: assessing the quality and limitations of « lab testing » for the evaluation of UX. Results: - validity of our assessment was limited to only the pragmatic aspects of the interaction - significant order effects - impact of the scenarios of use on the felt experience - impact of the environment and the lack of ecological validity - lack of evaluation of the dynamics of the experience
  19. 19. We need to evaluate UX in a natural or realistic setting Field testing and observation "In-sitro" user testing (Kjeldskov et al., 2004) Experience sampling (Csikszentmihalyi , 1990) 2 Ecological validity and the « turn to the wild »
  20. 20. Before usage Anticipated UX Imagining experience During usage Momentary UX Experiencing After usage Episodic UX Reflecting on an experience Over time Cumulative UX Recollecting multiple periods of use When: What: How: UX White Paper, 2010 There are several time spans of UX UX starts before the interaction and doesn’t end immediately after the interaction UX is highly dynamic 3
  21. 21. traditional or psychophysiological evaluation methods focus on momentary UX… this is not enough! UX White Paper, 2010 user testing psychophysiological measurements Before usage Anticipated UX Imagining experience During usage Momentary UX Experiencing After usage Episodic UX Reflecting on an experience Over time Cumulative UX Recollecting multiple periods of use When: What: How: UX is highly dynamic 3
  22. 22. The memory of an experience matters more than the experience itself Episodic UX is a reconstruction, a remembered experience biased by cognitive processes The momentary experience is not as important as the way it is remembered. It’s the memory of an experience that influences user’s behavior and the way he talks or recommends the product to someone 4
  23. 23. We need to assess UX across time and to focus on the memory of experiences UX Curve (Kujala et al., 2011) Diary methods Retrospective UX assessment Analytic scale (Karapanos et al., 2010) Longitudinal study 3 4
  24. 24. The UX Curve method: retrospective UX evaluation What they will tell you is biased by their memory, it is not similar to how they really felt What matters is how they remember the experience with your system because they will behave on this basis. Unvalid, yet reliable? performed simply on the basis of whether the starting point of the curve was higher or lower compared to the end point. For example, the curve in Fig. 2 was categorized as being improving as its start- ing point was lower than its ending point, even though the curve deteriorates in the middle. If the starting and ending points were at the same level, the curve was categorized as stable. As the curves were freehand drawings, they were categorized as stable if there was a very small deviation (less than one millimeter) between the vertical values of the starting and ending points of the curve. However, it can be seen from Figs. 3–10 that the categorization was rather straight-forward to do with the three trend type catego- ries. The relationships between the curve types and the key Fig. 4. The deteriorating and stable general UX Curves with user IDs. Fig. 5. The improving Attractiveness curves with user IDs. Fig. 7. The improving ease of use curves with user IDs. Fig. 8. The deteriorating and stable ease of use curves with user IDs. Fig. 4. The deteriorating and stable general UX Curves with user IDs. Fig. 5. The improving Attractiveness curves with user IDs. Fig. 6. The deteriorating and stable Attractiveness curves with user IDs. Fig. 7. The improving ease of use curves with user IDs. Fig. 8. The deteriorating and stable ease of use curves with user IDs. Fig. 9. The improving utility curves with user IDs. Results: Mean attractiveness curves 8 3.6.2011 Facebook Mobile phoneLong-term UX curves (for a specific UX dimension) Kujala et al., 2011
  25. 25. UX is about emotions and psychological needs Thinking about the experience first Designing for emotions and psychological needs Using science-based design tools 5
  26. 26. Using science-based (yet pragmatic) design tools 5 UX theories as powerful triggers of innovative design ideas —> Defining your Unique Value Proposition PLEX Cards playful experiences (Lucéro & Arrasvuori, 2010) Positive Emotional Granularity Cards (Yoon, Desmet, & Pohlmeyer, 2013) UX Cards psychological needs (Lallemand et al., 2015)
  27. 27. PLEX Cards playful experiences (Lucéro & Arrasvuori, 2010) Positive Emotional Granularity Cards (Yoon, Desmet, & Pohlmeyer, 2013) UX Cards psychological needs (Lallemand et al., 2015) Download them now! http://uxmind.eu/ portfolio/ux-design-and- evaluation-cards www.funkydesignspaces. com/plex/ www.diopd.org/ emotioncards
  28. 28. Established evaluation methods only explore a limited part of UX single user testing sessions psychophysiological measurements expert evaluationusability scales As we gain a deeper understanding of UX, we have to adapt the methods we use to ensure validity
  29. 29. 01 WORLD IA DAY 2016 Some kind of illustration or image? HEADER OPTION SUB HEAD OR SHORT DESCRIPTION Some kind of explanatory text, reference or footnote can go here and wrap to two lines, if needed. USING THE METHODS RIGHT 2
  30. 30. UX RESEARCH METHODS ARE « Ingredients and Meals Rather Than Recipes » …just as the quality of what is cooked reflects the quality of its ingredients, so does the quality of UX work reflect the quality of resources as configured and combined. Woolrych et al., 2011
  31. 31. 01 TARGETING REPRESENTATIVE USERS THE IMPORTANCE OF SAMPLING
  32. 32. 01 SAMPLING: TARGETING THE RIGHT USERS Making the most out of opportunistic sampling? Probability sampling: process that gives all the individuals in the population equal chances of being selected Opportunistic sampling: the availability of participants guides on-the-spot sampling decisions Sample size vary in different research settings. All else being equal, large sized sample leads to increased precision in estimates of various properties of the population.
  33. 33. 01 WHAT ABOUT GUERRILLA RESEARCH? A reasonable option? Fast and cheap way to get a certain type of feedback • Only for consumer-oriented product • Testing the understanding of the Value Proposition or the usability of one specific feature Not always ‘better than no research’
  34. 34. 01 IDENTIFYING CONFOUNDING VARIABLES AVOIDING RESEARCH BIASES
  35. 35. 01 RESEARCH BIASES A few examples Selection bias: one relevant group in the population has a higher probability of being included in the sample. —> Choosing a random or representative sample Experimenter / interviewer bias: differential treatment of participants —> Standardized procedures and instructions. Expectancy / observer bias: the researcher’s expectations affect the outcome of a study —> Having independent observers and computing inter-raters agreement Social desirability bias: the tendency of respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others —> Careful formulation of questions and items. Use of projective techniques.
  36. 36. 01 VALIDITY THROUGH DATA TRIANGULATION USING MIXED-METHOD
  37. 37. 01 COMBINING QUANTITATIVE & QUALITATIVE Understanding « how » and « why » Quantitative research methods: rely on using large sample sizes to establish trends and conclusions. Qualitative research: appropriate for getting a more in-depth, contextual understanding of why those trends occur. The best research strategies incorporate both approaches
  38. 38. Profile Unfinished sentence UX dimension non ebook- reader Compared with a paper book, a digital book is… Comparison between products In my opinion, digital books are addressed to… Identity / product image I have never read digital books because… Frustrations / Barriers to use I would read a digital book if… Expectations and needs I expect a digital book to / that… Expectations and needs When I read a paper book, I feel… Affects ebook reader Compared with a paper book, a digital book is… Comparison between products The reading experience on a digital book is… Global UX The problem with ebooks is… Issues and frustrations What I love about ebooks is… Positive aspects / Appropriation factors What frustrates me the most with a digital book is… Issues and frustrations I find that the interface of a digital book is… Specific UX - Interface I dream of a digital book that… Expectations / Dreams Ongoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015) Designing an optimal e-reading experience
  39. 39. 01 LIKERT SCALE VS. SENTENCE COMPLETION On a 7-points Likert scale, how would you rate your overall e-reading experience? (N = 1284) Self-reported overall e-reading experience (7 points Likert scale) Valence Frequency Percent Negative 228 17,8 % Positive 817 63,9 % Neutral 160 12,5 % Mixted 74 5,8 % « The reading experience on a digital book is… » Valence analysis of sentence L_SC_2 Ongoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015) Designing an optimal e-reading experience
  40. 40. 01 LIKERT SCALE VS. SENTENCE COMPLETION The problem with ebooks is… - the price - the lack of availability and choice - the absence of a sensual experience (feeling the paper in one’s hands) - the navigation and information architecture - the battery / the need for a network connexion - their bad quality - the impossibility to lend the book to a friend - DRM (digital rights management) - the bad reading experience - the screen and visual fatigue - it is dematerialized - … that you don’t see what people are reading because you don’t see the book cover… you can't skim or flip through easily I’m not able to physically track my progress in the book Designing an optimal e-reading experience Ongoing study (Lallemand & Mercier, 2015)
  41. 41. 01 VALIDITY & RIGOR, YET SCALED TO THE NEED Basing strategic decisions on valid findings Rigor should be proportional to the risk Catching up on emerging research and using freely available valid yet lightweight UX methods developed in Academia Rethinking your Unique Value Proposition thanks to UX theories
  42. 42. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Dr. Carine Lallemand Twitter @carilall http://uxmind.eu
  43. 43. 01 REFERENCES • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience, Harper and Row. • Hassenzahl, Marc (2013): User Experience and Experience Design. In: Soegaard, Mads and Dam, Rikke Friis (eds.). "The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.". Aarhus, Denmark: The Interaction Design Foundation. • Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2003). AttrakDiff : Ein Fragebogen zur Mes- sung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In J. Ziegler & G. Szwillus (Eds.) Mensch & Computer 2003. Interaktion in Bewegung, 187–196. Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner. • Kahneman, D., et al., (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The Day Reconstruction Method, Science, CCCVI(5), 702. • Karapanos, E., Martens, J.-B., & Hassenzahl, M. (2010). On the Retrospective Assessment of Users’ Experiences Over Time : Memory or Actuality ? Proc. of CHI 2010, 2689-2698. • Kjeldskov, J., & Skov, M.B. (2007). Studying Usability In Sitro : Simulating Real World Phenomena in Controlled Environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Interac- tion, 22(1-2), 7–36. • Kujala,S., Roto,V., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila,K., Karapanos,E., &Sinnelä,A. (2011). UX Curve: A method for evaluating long-term user experience. Interacting with Computers, 23, 473-483. • Lallemand, C. (2015). Towards Consolidated Methods for the Design and Evaluation of User Experience. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Luxembourg. https://publications.uni.lu/handle/10993/21463 • Laugwitz, B, Held, T., & Schrepp, M. (2008). Construction and evaluation of a user expe- rience questionnaire. In A. Holzinger (Ed.) USAB 2008, LNCS 5298. Berlin: Springer Verlag. • Lucero, A., & Arrasvuori. J. (2010) PLEX Cards : a source of inspiration when designing for playfulness. Proc. of Fun and Games 2010. New York, USA: ACM, 28-37.
  44. 44. 01 REFERENCES • Minge, M., & Riedel, L. (2013). meCUE – Ein modularer Fragebogen zur Erfassung des Nutzungserlebens. Presented at Mensch und Computer 2013, Bremen. • Roto, V., Law, E., Vermeeren, A., & Hoonhout, J. (2011) User Experience White Paper: Bringing clarity to the concept of user experience. Result from Dagstuhl Seminar on Demar- cating User Experience, Finland. • Thüring, M., & Mahlke, S. (2007). Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human-technology interaction. International Journal of Psychology, 42(4), 253-264. • Yoon, J., Desmet, P. M. A., & Pohlmeyer, A. E. (2013). Embodied Typology of Positive Emotions: The Development of a Tool to Facilitate Emotional Granularity in Design (pp. 1195–1206). Presented at the 5th International Congress of International Association of Sciences of Design Research, Tokyo, Japan. • Woolrych, A., Hornbæk, K., Frøkjær, E. & Cockton, G. (2011). “Ingredients and meals rather than recipes : a proposal for research that does not treat usability evaluation methods as indivisible wholes”. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 27(10), 940-970 • Adam Cooper, Cetis Blog 2014 - http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/ • http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/complete-beginners-guide-to-design-research/ Download the UX Cards : http://uxmind.eu/portfolio/ux-design-and-evaluation-cards Download the PLEX Cards : http://www.funkydesignspaces.com/plex/ Download the Positive Emotional Granularity Cards : www.diopd.org/emotioncards

×