Abstract
Early stage prototyping gains ever more importance in product development and User Experience (UX) evaluation. Especially in innovative technology and service domains (e.g., VR, AR, IoT) with increasing relevance of experiential aspects, early prototyping and evaluation is crucial to assess a product idea’s success potential. A central question is which prototyping approach best represents the product idea and allows its valid yet cost- and time-efficient evaluation. While low-fidelity prototyping supports low-cost adjustments, a potential biasing factor are idealization tendencies: UX evaluation subjects may idealize unspecified product aspects following their imagination, possibly reducing results’ validity. This study (N = 255) examines effects of prototype fidelity within early product development comparing different product concept representations systematically. Results imply that the lower the fidelity, the more people idealize a product idea, having numerous implications for prototype use in UX design and research. Practices to counteract idealization tendencies and optimize low-fidelity prototyping are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
McCurdy, M., Connors, C., Pyrzak, G., Kanefsky, B., Vera, A.: Breaking the fidelity barrier: an examination of our current characterization of prototypes and an example of a mixed-fidelity success. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1233–1242 (2006)
Blomkvist, J., Holmlid, S.: Existing prototyping perspectives: considerations for service design. Nordes 4, 1–10 (2011)
Diefenbach, S., Chien, W.C., Lenz, E., Hassenzahl, M.: Prototypen auf dem Prüfstand. Bedeutsamkeit der Repräsentationsform im Rahmen der Konzeptevaluation. i-com Zeitschrift für interaktive und kooperative Medien 12(1), 53–63 (2013)
Hochreuter, T., Kohler, K., Maurer, M.: Prototypen im Kontext begreifbarer Interaktion besser verstehen. In: Mensch and Computer, pp. 169–180 (2013)
Walker, M., Takayama, L., Landay, J.A.: High-fidelity or low-fidelity, paper or computer? Choosing attributes when testing web prototypes. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 661–665 (2002)
Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Roto, V., Hassenzahl M.: Towards practical user experience evaluation methods. Meaningful measures: Valid useful user experience measurement (VUUM), pp. 19–22 (2008)
Diefenbach, S., Hassenzahl, M.: Psychologie in der nutzerzentrierten Produktgestaltung: Mensch-Technik-Interaktion-Erlebnis. Springer, Berlin (2017)
Sauer, J., Sonderegger, A.: The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion. Appl. Ergon. 40(4), 670–677 (2009)
Cardozo, R.N.: An experimental study of customer effort, expectation, and satisfaction. J. Mark. Res. 2, 244–249 (1965)
Oliver, R.L.: Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on post exposure product evaluations: an alternative interpretation. J. Appl. Psychol. 62(4), 480–486 (1977)
Oliver, R.L.: A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. J. Mark. Res. 17(4), 460–469 (1980)
Lim, Y.K., Stolterman, E., Tenenberg, J.: The anatomy of prototypes: prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Trans. Comput.- Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 15(2), 7–27 (2008)
Virzi, R.A., Sokolov, J.L., Karis, D.: Usability problem identification using both low- and high-fidelity prototypes. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Common Ground, pp. 236–243 (1996)
Struckmeier, A.: Warum “gutes Aussehen” nicht immer von Vorteil ist. Über den Einfluss der optischen Gestaltung von Prototypen auf das Nutzerverhalten im Usability-Test. In: Brau, H., Lehmann, A., Petrovic, K., Schroeder, M.C. (eds.) Usability Professionals 2011, pp. 52–57. German Chapter der Usability Professionals’ Association e.V., Stuttgart (2001)
Frey, D., Jonas, E.: Die Theorie der kognizierten Kontrolle. In: Frey, D., Irle, M. (eds.) Theorien der Sozialpsychologie, pp. 13–50. Huber, Bern (2002)
Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P.: Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57(9), 705 (2002)
Fischhoff, B.: Hindsight is not equal to foresight: the effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 1(3), 288–299 (1975)
Oliver, R.L., Bearden, W.O.: The role of involvement in satisfaction processes. Adv. Consum. Res. 10, 250–255 (1983)
Spreng, R.A., Sonmez, E.: The moderating effect of involvement on the consumer satisfaction formation process. In: American Marketing Association Conference Proceedings, vol. 11, pp. 168–174 (2000)
Acknowledgments
Part of this research has been funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), project ProFI (FKZ: 01IS16015).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Christoforakos, L., Diefenbach, S. (2019). Idealization Effects in UX Evaluation at Early Concept Stages: Challenges of Low-Fidelity Prototyping. In: Ahram, T., Falcão, C. (eds) Advances in Usability, User Experience and Assistive Technology. AHFE 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 794. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94947-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94947-5_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94946-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94947-5
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)