Improving Sense of Well-Being by Managing Memories of Experience

  • Mark ChignellEmail author
  • Chelsea de Guzman
  • Leon Zucherman
  • Jie Jiang
  • Jonathan Chan
  • Nipon Charoenkitkarn
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9735)


Memories of experience are influenced by a peak-end effect [13]. Memories are modified to emphasize the final portions of an experience, and the peak positive, or negative, portion of that experience. We examine peak-end effects on judged Technical Quality (TQ) of online video. In two studies, sequences of different types of video disruption were varied so as to manipulate the peak-end effect of the experiences. The first experiment demonstrated an end effect, plus a possible peak effect involving negative, but not positive, experience. The second study manipulated payment conditions so that some sessions were structured as requiring payment to watch the video. The second study also distinguished between a peak effect and a possible sequence effect. Evidence was again found for an end effect, with a secondary effect of sequence, but no evidence was found for a peak effect independent of sequencing.


Technical quality Over-The-Top video Peak-End effect 



The authors would like to thank KanmanusOngvisatepaiboon for his assistance in developing the software used in the experiment. This research was funded by a grant from TELUS Communications Company, and by an NSERC Collaborative Research Development Grant, both to the first author.


  1. 1.
    Fredrickson, B.L., Kahneman, D.: Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 65(1), 45–55 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kahneman, D.: Thinking Fast and Slow. Random House, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moeller, S., Raake, A.: Quality of Experience: Advanced Concepts, Applications and Methods. Springer, Cham (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chignell, M., Zucherman, L., Kaya, D., Jiang, J.: Peak-end effects in video quality of experience. In: IEEE Digital Media Industry and Academic Forum, Santorini, Greece (2016, to appear) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bharadwaj, S.G., Varadarajan, R., Fahy, J.: Sustainable competitive advantage in service industries: a conceptual model and research propositions. J. Mark. 57(4), 83–99 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li, W., Spachos, P., Chignell, M., Leon-Garcia, A., Zucherman, L., Jiang, J.: Impact of technical and content quality of overall experience of OTT Video. In: 2016 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC) (in press)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ITU-T.: Subjective Video Quality Assessment Methods for Multimedia Applications. Recommendation P. 910, Telecommunication Standardization Sector of ITU (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leon-Garcia, A., Zucherman, L.: Generalizing MOS to assess technical quality for end-to-end telecom session. In: Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps), pp. 681–687. IEEE, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Laghari, K., Gupta, R., Arndt, S., Antons, J-N., Schleicher, R., Möller, S., Falk, T.H.: Neurophysiological experimental facility for quality of experience (QoE) assessment. In: Proceedings of the First IFIP/IEEE International Workshop on Quality of Experience Centric Management, pp. 1300–1305. IEEE, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khirman, S., Henriksen, P.: Relationship between quality of service and quality of experience for public internet service, In: Proceedings of Passive and Active Measurement (PAM 2002), Fort Collins, Colorado, (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spachos, P., Li, W., Chignell, M., Leon-Garcia, A., Zucherman, L., Jiang, J.: Acceptability and quality of experience in over the top video. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Communication Workshop (ICCW), pp. 1693–1698. IEEE, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lottridge, D., Chignell, M., Jovicic, A.: Affective interaction understanding, evaluating, and designing for human emotion. Rev. Hum. Fact. Ergon. 7(1), 197–217 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kahneman, D.: New challenges to the rationality assumption. In: Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (eds.) Choices, Values, and Frames, pp. 758–774. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baumgartner, H., Sujan, M., Padgett, D.: Patterns of affective reactions to advertisements: the integration of moment-to-moment responses into overall judgments. J. Mark. Res. 34, 219–232 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chignell, M., Kealey, R., DeGuzman, C., Zucherman, L., Jiang, J.: Using visualizations to measure SQE: individual differences, and pricing and disruption type effects. Working paper, Interactive Media Lab, University of Toronto (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Field, A., Miles, J., Field, Z.: Discovering Statistics Using R. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Chignell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Chelsea de Guzman
    • 1
  • Leon Zucherman
    • 1
  • Jie Jiang
    • 2
  • Jonathan Chan
    • 3
  • Nipon Charoenkitkarn
    • 3
  1. 1.The University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.TELUS Communications CompanyTorontoCanada
  3. 3.King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT)BangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations