The Effect of Age to the Perception of Apparent Usability and Affective Quality on Prototype Mobile Phones

  • Rosemary R. SevaEmail author
  • Justin Joseph M. Apolonio
  • Ailea Kamille L. Go
  • Katrina Anne G. Puesta
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)


In this study, a design framework that integrates functional and aesthetic attributes with apparent usability and affective quality was validated using prototypes. The framework was validated using a mobile phone which is a high involvement product. Product attributes that affected visual evaluation prior to usage were selected and categorized into functional and aesthetic attributes. Nine design alternatives were generated out of varied functional and aesthetic design attributes. A survey was used to evaluated each design alternative in terms of the pre-purchase dimensions of affective quality, apparent usability, and desirability. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to validate the design framework. After conducting the experiment, the model obtained has a good fit and the relationships were significant. It was found that affective quality has the greatest direct effect on desirability and apparent usability has the greatest total effect on desirability. Functional attributes have significant total effects on apparent usability and desirability. For comparative analysis, older people’s perception on functional attributes have a greater effect on apparent usability, affective quality and desirability. Finally, it can be said that apparent usability evokes more emotions for people having greater usability needs such as older people.


Affective design Usability Structural equation model 


  1. 1.
    Lai H, Chang Y, Chang H (2005) A robust design approach for enhancing the feeling quality of a product: a car profile case study. Int J Ind Ergon 35:445–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zaichkowsky J (1985) Measuring the involvement construct. J Consum Res 12:341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Desmet P From disgust to desire: how products elicit emotions. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference Design and EmotionGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Russell JA (2003) Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. J Psychol Rev 110:145–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kurosu M, Kashimura K Apparent usability vs. inherent usability experimental analysis on the determinants of the apparent usability. In: CHI 1995 Conference CompanionGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pelzer T, Jong A, Kanis H Towards the design of a mobile phone for technology-averse people of all ages. In: 39th Nordic Ergonomics Society ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seva RR, Duh HB, Helander MG (2007) The marketing implications of affective product design. Appl Ergon 38:723–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shryock H, Siegel J (1980) The Methods and Materials of Demography Four Printing, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Houde S (2007) Vision Loss in Older Adults: Nursing Assessment and Care Management. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ross CE, Mirowsky J (2008) Age and the balance of emotions. Soc Sci Med 66:2391–2400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Archer J (1985) Sex and Gender, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Kurniawan S (2008) Older people and mobile phones: A multi-method investigation. Int J Hum Comput Stud 66:889–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chung MK, Kim D, Na S, Lee D (2010) Usability evaluation of numeric entry tasks on keypad type and age. Int J Ind Ergon 40:97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schneiderman B (2000) Universal usability. In: Crawford D (ed.) Communications of the ACM, vol 43, pp 84–91. CACM, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seva RR, Gosiaco KG, Santos MC, Pangilinan DM (2011) Product design enhancement using apparent usability and affective quality. Appl Ergon 42:511–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ryu Y, Smith-Jackson T (2006) Reliability and validity of the mobile phone usability questionnaire (MPUQ). J Usab Stud 2:39–53Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seva RR, Helander MG (2009) The influence of cellular phone attributes on users’ affective experiences: a cultural comparison. Int J Ind Ergon 39:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Rivers T (2008) Technology’s role in the confusion of needs and wants. Technol Soc 30:104–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lazarus R (1991) Emotion and Adaptation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosemary R. Seva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Justin Joseph M. Apolonio
    • 1
  • Ailea Kamille L. Go
    • 1
  • Katrina Anne G. Puesta
    • 1
  1. 1.De La Salle UniversityManilaPhilippines

Personalised recommendations