Abstract
In the 2010s, concepts of both the human-centered design (HCD) and user experience (UX) have proved to be significant in providing efficient systems and services. Additionally, many methodologies to improve UX and usability are being proposed. However, UX is basically a complicated concept, and its design process requires not only engineering skills but also factors such as psychological knowledge, social understanding, and human-behavior consideration among others. To acquire the necessary abilities to realize a practical UX design, the differences between good UX and poor UX must be understood. In this study, a survey was conducted by collecting the opinions of university students. The questionnaire asked them to mention several examples of systems/services that provided good UX or poor UX. The results imply what types of services are liked and disliked by students. Therefore, this study would be informative for developers and designers who plan to provide their services for the young generation.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
References
ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html. Accessed 9 Mar 2020
User-centered design, From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-centered_design. Accessed 9 Mar 2020
Nacke, L. E., Mirza-Babaei, P., Drachen, A.: User experience (UX) researchin games. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland, UK (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3298826
Alenljung, B., Lindblom, J., Andreasson, R., Ziemke, T.: User Experience in Social Human-Robot Interaction. Int. J. Ambient Comput. Intell. 8(2), 12–31 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJACI.2017040102
Marti, P., Iacono, I.: Anticipated, momentary, episodic, remembered: the manyfacets of user experience. In: Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, vol. 8, pp. 1647–1655. ACSIS (2016). ISSN 2300–5963. https://doi.org/10.15439/2016F302
Vermeeren, A.P.O.S, Effie Law, E.L.C., Roto, V., Obrist, M., Jettie Hoonhout, J., Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K.: User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2010, Reykjavik, Iceland (2010)
Lachner, F., Naegelein, P., Kowalski, R., Spann, M., and Butz, A.: Quantified UX: towards a common organizational understanding of user experience. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI 2016, Gothenburg, Sweden (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2971501
Hinderks, A., Schrepp, M., Mayo, F.J.D., Escalona, M.J., Thomaschewski, J.: Developing a UX KPI based on the user experience questionnaire. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 65, 38–44 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2019.01.007
Schrepp, M., Hinderks, A., Thomaschewski, J.: Construction of a benchmark for the user experience questionnaire (UEQ). Int. J. Interact. Multimed. Artif. Intell. 4(4), 40–44 (2017). https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2017.445
Sari Kujala, S., Roto, V., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Karapanos, E., Sinnelä, A.: UX curve: a method for evaluating long-term user experience. Interact. Comput. 23, 473–483 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.06.005
Linder, J., Arvola. M.: IPA of UX: interpretative phenomenological analysis in a user experience design practice. In: Proceedings of ECCE 2017—European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Umeå, Sweden (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3121283.3121299
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Iio, J. (2020). What Are the Differences Between Good and Poor User Experience?. In: Czarnowski, I., Howlett, R., Jain, L. (eds) Intelligent Decision Technologies. IDT 2020. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 193. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5925-9_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5925-9_38
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-5924-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-5925-9
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)