Advertisement

Human-Computer Interaction to Human-Computer-Context Interaction: Towards a Conceptual Framework for Conducting User Studies for Shifting Interfaces

  • Stephanie Van Hove
  • Jolien De Letter
  • Olivia De Ruyck
  • Peter Conradie
  • Anissa All
  • Jelle Saldien
  • Lieven De Marez
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10918)

Abstract

Computer interfaces have been diversifying: from mobile and wearable technologies to the human body as an interface. Moreover, new sensing possibilities have allowed input to interfaces to go beyond the traditional mouse- and keyboard. This has resulted in a shift from manifest to latent interactions, where interactions between the human and the computer are becoming less visible. Currently, there is no framework available that fully captures the complexity of the multidimensional, multimodal, often latent interactions with these constantly shifting interfaces. In this manuscript, the Human-Computer-Context Interaction (HCCI) framework is proposed. This framework defines 5 relevant interaction levels to be considered during user research in all stages of the new product development process in order to optimize user experience. More specifically, the interaction context is defined in terms of user-object, user-user, user-content, user-platform and user-context interactions. The HCCI framework serves as a concrete tool to use in a new product development process by HCI researchers, designers, and developers and aims to be technology independent and future-proof. This framework is a preliminary suggestion to be matched against other innovation development projects and needs to be further validated.

Keywords

Human-computer interaction Ubiquitous computing Interaction context User research Product design Product evaluation Framework User experience 

References

  1. 1.
    All, A., Looy, J.V., Castellar, E.N.: Digital game-based learning under the microscope. Development of a procedure for assessing the effectiveness of educational games aimed at cognitive learning outcomes. University Press (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bannon, L.J.: From human factors to human actors: the role of psychology and human-computer interaction studies in system design. In: Readings in Human–Computer Interaction, pp. 205–214 (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-051574-8.50024-8Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bargas-Avila, J.A., Hornbæk, K.: Old wine in new bottles or novel challenges. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2011, p. 2689 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979336
  4. 4.
    Bødker, S.: When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In: Proceedings of the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction Changing Roles - NordiCHI 2006, pp. 1–8 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1182475.1182476
  5. 5.
    Calder, B.J., Phillips, L.W., Tybout, A.M.: The concept of external validity. J. Consum. Res. 9(3), 240 (1982).  https://doi.org/10.1086/208920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell, D.T., Stanley, J.C.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston (1963)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coorevits, L., Jacobs, A.: Taking real-life seriously: an approach to decomposing context beyond “ environment” in living labs. Technol. Innov. Manag. Rev. 7(1), 26–36 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Dam, A.: Post-WIMP user interfaces. Commun. ACM 40(2), 63–67 (1997).  https://doi.org/10.1145/253671.253708MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dourish, P.: What we talk about when we talk about context. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 8(1), 19–30 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-003-0253-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dubois, E., Celentano, A.: Analysing interaction trajectories in multi-device applications. In: Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction - NordiCHI 2016, pp. 1–6 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2996726
  11. 11.
    Egger, S., Reichl, P., Schoenenberg, K.: Quality of experience and interactivity. In: Möller, S., Raake, A. (eds.) Quality of Experience. TSTS, pp. 149–161. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Geerts, D., De Moor, K., Ketyko, I., Jacobs, A., Van den Bergh, J., Joseph, W., Martens, L., De Marez, L.: Linking an integrated framework with appropriate methods for measuring QoE. In: 2010 Second International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), pp. 158–163 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1109/QOMEX.2010.5516292
  14. 14.
    Gliner, J.A.: Internal and external validity in two studies that compared treatment methods. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 43(6), 403–407 (1989).  https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.43.6.403. Official Publication of the American Occupational Therapy AssociationCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanington, B., Martin, B.: Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems (2012). https://www.iitgn.ac.in/sites/default/files/library_files/2016/04072016.pdf%5Cnpapers3://publication/uuid/FD316216-3845-47B5-B7DA-0E68CD4B3014
  16. 16.
    Hassenzahl, M., Diefenbach, S., Göritz, A.: Needs, affect, and interactive products - facets of user experience. Interact. Comput. 22(5), 353–362 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.04.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hesmer, A., Hribernik, K.A., Baalsrud Hauge, J.M., Thoben, K.D.: Supporting the ideation processes by a collaborative online based toolset. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 55(3/4), 218 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2011.041948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hribernik, K.A., Ghrairi, Z., Hans, C., Thoben, K.-D.: Co-creating the internet of things - first experiences in the participatory design of intelligent products with Arduino. In: 2011 17th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising (ICE), pp. 1–9 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ishii, H.: The tangible user interface and its evolution. Commun. ACM 51(6), 32 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1349026.1349034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koreshoff, T.L., Leong, T.W., Robertson, T.: Approaching a human-centred internet of things. In: Proceedings of the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference on Augmentation, Application, Innovation, Collaboration - OzCHI 2013, pp. 363–366 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2541016.2541093
  21. 21.
    Kortum, P.: HCI Beyond the GUI: Design for Haptic, Speech, Olfactory, and Other Nontraditional Interfaces. Techniques, p. 462 (2008). http://www.amazon.de/dp/0123740177Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McQuarrie, E.: Focus groups and the development of new products by technologically driven companies: some guidelines. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 3(1), 40–47 (1986).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0737-6782(86)90042-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mosbergen, D.: This Luxury Alarm Clock Wakes You Up With A Freshly Brewed Cup Of Coffee. The Huffington Post (2014). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/05/alarm-clock-coffee-barisieur_n_5651014.html
  24. 24.
    Oulasvirta, A.: Field experiments in HCI: Promises and challenges (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-385-9-5
  25. 25.
    Oulasvirta, A., Tamminen, S., Roto, V., Kuorelahti, J.: Interaction in 4-second bursts. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2005, p. 919 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1055101
  26. 26.
    Parsons, T.D.: Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social neurosciences. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9, 660 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00660
  27. 27.
    Poppe, R., Rienks, R., van Dijk, B.: Evaluating the future of HCI: challenges for the evaluation of emerging applications. In: Huang, Thomas S., Nijholt, A., Pantic, M., Pentland, A. (eds.) Artifical Intelligence for Human Computing. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4451, pp. 234–250. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72348-6_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rogers, Y.: HCI theory: classical, modern, and contemporary. Synth. Lect. Hum.-Centered Inform. 5(2), 1–129 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sanders, E.B.-N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4(1), 5–18 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sinha, P.K., Uniyal, D.P.: Using observational research for behavioural segmentation of shoppers. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 12(1), 35–48 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2004.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Visser, F.S., Stappers, P.J., van der Lugt, R., Sanders, E.B.-N.: Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign 1(2), 119–149 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880500135987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Walker, M.J.: Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies 2017, July 2017. www.gartner.com
  33. 33.
    Wechsung, I., De Moor, K.: Quality of experience versus user experience. In: Möller, S., Raake, A. (eds.) Quality of Experience. TSTS, pp. 35–54. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am. (Int. Ed.) 265(3), 66–75 (1991).  https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0991-94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weiser, M., Brown, J.S.: The coming age of calm technology. In: Denning, P.J., Metcalfe, R.M. (eds.) Beyond Calculation, pp. 75–85. Springer, New York (1997).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0685-9_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wenkai, X., Lee, E.-J.: Human-computer natural user interface based on hand motion detection and tracking. J. Korea Multimedia Soci. 15(4), 501–507 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.9717/kmms.2012.15.4.501CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephanie Van Hove
    • 1
  • Jolien De Letter
    • 1
  • Olivia De Ruyck
    • 1
  • Peter Conradie
    • 1
    • 2
  • Anissa All
    • 1
  • Jelle Saldien
    • 1
  • Lieven De Marez
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Communication Sciencesimec-mict-UGent, Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Industrial System and Product DesignGhent UniversityKortrijkBelgium

Personalised recommendations