Advertisement

Differentiating between Successful and Less Successful Products by Using MAInEEAC – A Model for Interaction Characterization

  • Steffen Hess
  • Andreas Maier
  • Marcus Trapp
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6761)

Abstract

Today, the success of a software product is defined by a great user experience caused by a well-defined interaction concept rather than features. Therefore we present a new interaction model called MAInEEAC (Model for Accurate Interaction Engineering, Enhancement, Alteration, and Characterization) that is able to show what makes an interaction a great experience and what are the elements of great human-computer-interaction. Having evaluated the ways of entering an address with nine distinct navigation systems, we present several findings which are crucial for making an interaction successful. Thereby it becomes clear that a higher level of detail is required in order to recognize important differences between single interactions. MAInEEAC provides these details and can be seen as a further step towards better understanding of human-computer-interaction.

Keywords

Human Computer Interaction Human System Interaction Interaction Design Interaction Engineering Interaction Model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bonto-Kane, M.V., St. Amant, R.: Computational modeling approaches help guide early design efforts for usability. In: The Fifth Richard Tapia Celebration of Diversity in Computing Conference: Intellect, Initiatives, Insight, and Innovations, TAPIA 2009, Portland, Oregon, April 01-04, ACM, New York (2009), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1565799.1565802 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Diefenbach, S., Hassenzahl, M., Kloeckner, K., Nass, C., Maier, A.: Ein Interaktionsvokabular: Dimensionen zur Beschreibung der Ästhetik von Interaktion. In: Brau, H., Diefenbach, S., Göring, K., Peissner, M., Petrovic, K. (eds.) Usability Professionals 2010, pp. 27–32. German Chapter der Usability Professionals’ Association e.V, Stuttgart (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dubberly, H., Pangaro, P., Haque, U.: ON MODELING What is interaction?: are there different types? Interactions 16(1), 69–75 (2009), doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1456202.1456220 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldbogen, G.: A generalization of the GOURD model of human-computer interaction. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Southeast Regional Conference (CD-Rom) ACM-SE 37, p. 48. ACM, New York (1999), doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/306363.306424 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO 14915-3. Software ergonomics for multimedia user interfaces– media selection and combination. Draft International Standard (2002) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kolski, C.: A “call for answers” around the proposition of an HCI-enriched model. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 23(3), 93–96 (1998), doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/279437.279483 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Obrenovic, Z., Abascal, J., Starcevic, D.: Universal accessibility as a multimodal design issue. Commun. ACM 50(5), 83–88 (2007), doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/.1241668 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pastel, R., Skalsky, N.: Object-action association: a HCI design model. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2004, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, January 13-16, pp. 295–297. ACM, New York (2004), doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/964442.964510 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schomaker, L., Munch, S., Hartung, K.: A taxonomy of multimodal interaction in the human information processing system. Technical report, ESPRIT BRA, No. 8579 (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sutcliffe, et al.: A Method and Advisor Tool for Multimedia User Interface Design. International 1230819 Journal of Man-Machine Studies 64(4), 375–392 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steffen Hess
    • 1
  • Andreas Maier
    • 1
  • Marcus Trapp
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software EngineeringKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations