Designing for User Experience and Engagement

  • Alistair SutcliffeEmail author


This chapter proposes a design framework for user engagement based on the background knowledge of theories and models that underpin design thinking and that foreground knowledge of principles and heuristics that can be applied when designing. The chapter presents a model that encompasses the context of use and leads to the criteria that can be selected to target the evaluation of engaging experiences. The chapter is rich in examples of engaging design and emphasizes, in particular, the affective components of users: both their personal dispositions and the emotions engendered through interaction. The goal of this chapter is to provide design knowledge and inspiration rather than being a “how to” approach to engaging design.


User Experience Virtual World Social Presence User Engagement National Gallery 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Al-Qaed, F., Sutcliffe, A.G.: Adaptive decision support system (ADSS) for B2C e-commerce. In: Proceedings 8th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 492–503. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embracing Change. Addison-Wesley, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benford, S., Giannachi, G., Koleva, B., Rodden, T.: From interaction to trajectories: designing coherent journeys through user experiences. In: Proceedings: CHI 2009: 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 709–718. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benyon, D., Turner, P., Turner, S.: Designing Interactive Systems: People, Activities, Contexts Technologies. Pearson Education, Harlow (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berlyne, D.E.: Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity. McGraw-Hill, New York (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blythe, M.A., Overbeeke, K., Monk, A.F., Wright, P.C.: Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment. Kluwer, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bolchini, D., Garzotto, F., Sorce, F.: Does branding need web usability? A value-oriented empirical study. Interact 2, 652–665 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buxton, B.: Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Callele, D., Neufeld, E., Schneider, K.: Emotional requirements in video games. In: Proceedings: 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference RE06, pp. 299–302. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carroll, J.M.: The Nurnberg Funnel: Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical Computer Skill. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carroll, J.M.: Making Use: Scenario-Based Design of Human-Computer Interactions. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clark, H.H.: Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cockton, G., Kujala, S., Nurkka, P., Höttä, T.: Supporting Worth Mapping with Sentence Completion. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5727. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cooper, A., Reimann, R., Cronin, D.: About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design. Wiley, Indianapolis (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Classic Work on How to Achieve Happiness, Revised edn. Rider, London (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cyr, D., Head, M., Ivanov, A.: Perceived interactivity leading to e-loyalty: development of a model for cognitive-affective user responses. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 67 (10), 850–869 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Angeli, A., Brahnam, S.: I hate you! Disinhibition with virtual partners. Interact. Comput. 20, 302–310 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Angeli, A., Sutcliffe, A., Hartmann, J.: Interaction, usability and aesthetics: what influences users’ preferences? In Proceedings: Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, DIS-06, pp. 271–280. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    De Bruijn, O., De Angeli, A., Sutcliffe, A.G.: Customer experience requirements for e-commerce web-sites. Int. J. Web Eng. Technol. 3 (4), 441–464 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Diefenbach, S., Hassenzahl, M.: The “beauty dilemma”: beauty is valued but discounted in product choice. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2009 Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems, pp. 1419–1426. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Djajadiningrat, J.P., Gaver, W.W., Frens, J.W.: Interaction relabelling and extreme characters: methods for exploring aesthetic interactions. In: Boyarski, D., Kellogg, W.A. (eds.) Proceedings of DIS2000 Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices Methods and Techniques, pp. 66–71. ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dourish, P.: Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hart, J.: Evaluating user engagement and interaction for design. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hart, J., Sutcliffe, A.G.: Love it or hate it! The UX of interactivity and user types. In: Proceedings of CHI 2013. ACM Press/Digital Library, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hartmann, J., Sutcliffe, A.G., De Angeli, A.: Investigating attractiveness in web user interfaces. In: Proceedings of CHI 2007. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hartmann, J., Sutcliffe, A.G., De Angeli, A.: Towards a theory of user judgment of aesthetics and user interface quality. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 15 (4), 15 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hassenzahl, M.: The interplay of beauty, goodness and usability in interactive products. Hum. Comput. Interact. 19, 319–349 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hassenzahl, M., Monk, A.: The inference of perceived usability from beauty. Hum. Comput. Interact. 25 (3), 235–260 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N.: User experience: a research agenda. Behav. Inf. Technol. 25, 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hassenzahl, M., Schöbel, M., Trautmann, T.: How motivational orientation influences the evaluation and choice of hedonic and pragmatic interactive products: the role of regulatory focus. Interact. Comput. 20, 473–479 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hassenzahl, M., Diefenbach, S., Göritz, A.S.: Needs, affect, and interactive products: facets of user experience. Interact. Comput. 22 (5), 353–362 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P.: Marketing in hypermedia computer mediated environments: conceptual foundations. J. Market. 60, 50–68 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jennett, C., Cox, A.L., et al.: Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 66 (9), 641–661 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Karapanos, E., Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Martens, J.B.: User experience over time: an initial framework. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2009 Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems, pp. 729–738. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Khan, R.F., Sutcliffe, A.G.: Attractive agents are more persuasive. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 30 (2), 142–150 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kristof, R., Satran, A.: Interactivity by Design: Creating and Communicating with New Media. Adobe Press, Mountain View (1995)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kujala, S., Roto, V., et al.: UX curve: a method for evaluating long-term user experience. Interact. Comput. 23, 473–483 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lavie, T., Tractinsky, N.: Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of websites. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 60, 269–298 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lee, S., Koubek, R.: Understanding user preference based on usability and aesthetics before and after actual use. Interact. Comput. 22 (6), 530–543 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lidwell, W., Holden K., Butler, J.: Universal Principles of Design. Rockport, Gloucester (2003)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lindgaard, G., Dudek, C., et al.: An exploration of relations between visual appeal, trustworthiness and perceived usability of homepages. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 18 (1), 1–30 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Magni, M.M., Taylor, S., Venkatesh, V.: To play or not to play? A cross temporal investigation using hedonic and instrumental perspectives to explain user intentions to explore a technology. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 68, 572–588 (2010)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    McCarthy, J., Wright, P.: Technology as Experience. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McMahan, R.P., Kopper, R., Bowman, D.A.: Principles for designing effective 3D interaction techniques. In: Hale, K.S., Stanney, K.M. (eds.) Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation and Applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2014)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mendoza, V., Novick, D.G.: Usability over time. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Design of Communication: Documenting and Designing for Pervasive Information, pp. 151–158. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mullet, K., Sano, D.: Designing Visual Interfaces: Communication Oriented Techniques. SunSoft Press, Englewood Cliffs (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    O’Brien, H.: The influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on user engagement: the case of online shopping experiences. Interact. Comput. 22 (5), 344–352 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    O’Brien, H., Lebow, M.: A mixed methods approach to measuring user experience in online news interactions. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 64 (8), 1543–1556 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    O’Brien, H., Toms, E.: What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59 (8), 938–955 (2008)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Payne, J.W., Bettman, J.R., Johnson, E.J.: The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Porat, T., Tractinsky, N.: It’s a pleasure buying here: the effects of web-store design on consumers’ emotions and attitudes. Hum. Comput. Interact. 27 (3), 235–276 (2012)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The media equation: how people treat computers, television and new media like real people and places. CLSI/Cambridge University Press, Stanford/Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Romero, P., Cavillo-Gamez, E.: An embodied view of flow. Interact. Comput. 26 (6), 513–527 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, Chichester (1976)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sundar, S.S., Bellur, S., Oh, J., Xu, Q., Jia, H.: User experience of on-screen interaction techniques: an experimental investigation of clicking, sliding, zooming, hovering, dragging and flipping. Hum. Comput. Interact. 29, 109–152 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sutcliffe, A.G.: Assessing the reliability of heuristic evaluation for website attractiveness and usability. In: Proceedings HICSS-35: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1838–1847. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sutcliffe, A.G.: Multimedia and Virtual Reality: Designing Multisensory User Interfaces. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2003)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sutcliffe, A.G.: Designing for user engagement: aesthetic and attractive user interfaces. In: Carroll, J.M. (ed.) Synthesis Lectures on Human Centered Informatics. Morgan Claypool, San Rafael (2009)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sutcliffe, A.G., Carroll, J.M.: Generalizing claims and reuse of HCI knowledge. In: Johnson, H., Nigay, L., Roast, C. (eds.) People and Computers XIII; Proceedings of BCS-HCI ’98, pp. 159–176. Springer, Berlin (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sutcliffe, A.G., De Angeli, A.: Assessing interaction styles in web user interfaces. In: Costabile, M.F., Paterno, F. (eds.) Proceedings of Interact 2005, pp. 405–417 (2005)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Teo, H.H., Oh, L.B., Liu, C., Wei, K.K.: An empirical study of the effects of interactivity on web user attitude. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 58 (3), 281–305 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tractinsky, N., Shoval-Katz, A., Ikar, D.: What is beautiful is usable. Interact. Comput. 13 (2), 127–145 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Travis, D.: Effective Colour Displays: Theory and Practice. Academic Press, Boston (1991)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Trevino, L.K. Lengel, R.H., Daft, R.L.: Media symbolism, media richness, and media choice in organizations: a symbolic interactionist perspective. Commun. Res. 5, 553–574 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Tuch, A.N., Roth, S.P., et al.: Is beautiful really usable? Towards understanding the relation between usability, aesthetics and affect in HCI. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28, 1596–1607 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Weibel, D., Wissmath, B.: Immersion in computer games: the role of spatial presence and flow. Int. J. Comput. Games Technol. 2011, Article ID 282345 (2011)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wirth, W., Hartmann, T., Bocking, S., et al.: A process model of the formation of spatial presence experiences. Media Psychol. 9, 493–525 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J.: Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence 7, 225–240 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wu, J., Lu, X.: Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators on using utilitarian, hedonic, and dual-purposed information systems: a meta-analysis. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 13 (3), 153–191 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Manchester Business SchoolUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations