Research on Comparison Experiment of Humanized Interface Design of Smart TV Based on User Experience

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 781)


5 Smart TV products (represented by the letter A–E) were selected in this study to compare the interface design. Twelve volunteers (6 males and 6 females) from 18 to 40 years old (M = 27.92, SD = 5.85) were recruited to complete the task of “playing an online movie” in a simulated living room environment. The evaluation results between 5 Smart TV products that based on user experience were significant differences, which might be the result of the distinction of humanized design. The layout of homepages, terminologies of icons to enter the subordinate pages, menu formats and the entrance position of the subordinate pages all affected the results.


Humanized interface design User experience Smart TV 



We would like to thank the participants who took part in the experiment. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support from 2017 National Quality Infrastructure (2017NQI) project (2017YFF0206603 and 2017YFF0206506), AQSIQ science and technology planning project (2016QK177), and China National Institute of Standardization through the “special funds for the basic R&D undertakings by welfare research institutions” (522016Y-4488).


  1. 1.
    Zhang, X.: The Analysis of Usability in Intereaction Design of Smart TV. Shandong Polytechnic University (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schall, A.: Eye tracking insights into effective navigation design. In: Design, User Experience, and Usability. Theories, Methods, and Tools for Designing the User Experience, pp. 363–370. Springer (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blackler, A.L., Popovic, V., Mahar, D.P.: Applying and testing design for intuitive interaction. Int. J. Des. Sci. Technol. 20(1), 7–26 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang, R.: The studies about interface design of smart TV based on user experience. Hefei University of Technology (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Outing, S., Ruel, L.: The best of eyetrack III: what we saw when we looked through their eyes. Poynter Institute (2004). Accessed 20 June 2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nielsen, J.: F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content.
  7. 7.
    Backs, R.W., Walrath, L.C., Hancock, G.A.: Comparison of horizontal and vertical menu formats. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 31, pp. 715–717 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deininger, R.L.: Human factors engineering studies of the design and use of pushbutton telephone sets. Bell Labs Tech. J. 39(4), 995–1012 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Molina-Rueda, A., Magallanes, Y., Sánchez, J.A., Enriquez, D.F.: Using heat maps for studying user preferences in vertical and horizontal multi-touch surfaces. In: International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Computing (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Näsänen, R., Karlsson, J., Ojanpää, H.: Display quality and the speed of visual letter search. Displays 22(4), 107–113 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grobelny, J., Karwowski, W., Drury, C.: Usability of graphical icons in the design of human-computer interfaces. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 18(2), 167–182 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ye, C., Liu, Z., Zhang, J.Q., et al.: Effect of environmental illumination on optimal value of mobile phone brightness. Chin. J. Liq. Cryst. Displays 29(6), 1042–1049 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li, H.T., Zhang, Y.X., Xu, W.D., et al.: Study on the optimal parameters of mobile phone screen brightness of difference environment illumination. Psychol. Sci. 36(5), 1110–1116 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shneiderman, B.: Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 5th edn. Person, London (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michalski, R., Grobelny, J., Karwowski, W.: The effects of graphical interface design characteristics on human–computer interaction task efficiency. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 36(11), 959–977 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, Q., Cui, L.X.: Reach of concreteness effects in semantic processing. J. Beijing Normal Univ. (Soc. Sci.) 4, 28–34 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, S.M.: Integrating service design and eye tracking insight for designing smart tv user interfaces. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 6, 7 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gong, Y.: Research on Graphic Symbols Design Recognition. Zhe Jang University (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldberg, J.H., Kotval, X.P.: Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 24(6), 631–645 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AQSIQ Key Laboratory of Human Factors and Ergonomics (CNIS)BeijingChina
  2. 2.Human Factor and Ergonomics LaboratoryChina National Institute of StandardizationBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations