Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 4, pp 5095–5116 | Cite as

Experience over time: evaluating the experience of use of a squeezable interface in the medium term



The paper presents the user experience evaluation of Squeeze Me, an interactive cover for tablet and smartphone that enables continuous and expressive interaction with electronic devices. The cover has been used to implement ”Squeeze to zoom”, a mobile application to zoom in and out while taking a photograph from a tablet. The experience of use was evaluated in the short and medium term, comparing the Squeeze Me interaction modality with classic modalities for zooming in and out commonly available on tablets and smartphones. The evaluation process was conducted using AttrakDiff [3] a questionnaire that measures hedonic stimulation and identity, as well as pragmatic qualities and attractiveness of software products. Participants were asked to try out different interaction modalities for comparison in the short-term (67 people) and over 4 weeks (8 people). Results obtained in the short-term evaluation reveal that “Squeeze to zoom” was awarded higher values than the classic “Slide to zoom” in the hedonic quality-stimulation and attractiveness dimensions, whilst it obtained lower values in the pragmatic quality and hedonic quality-identity. However, the experience of use changed over time. During the longitudinal study, the usability of “Squeeze to zoom” improved whilst the attractiveness of “Slide to zoom” decreases significantly. Furthermore results reveal that “Squeeze to zoom” is significantly more appreciated for its hedonic qualities and the effect is maintained over time. This study highlights the importance of evaluating the experience of use over time, a practice that is almost ignored in the literature on Experience Design.


Squeezable interface Tangible interaction User experience evaluation Interaction design Input/output devices Longitudinal study Short-term evaluation 


  1. 1.
    Bruns Alonso M, Keyson DV, Hummels CCM (2008) Squeeze, rock, and roll; can tangible interaction with affective products support stress reduction?. In Proc. of the 2nd international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, pp 105–108Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harrison BL, Fishkin K, Gujar A, Mochon C, Want R (1998) The design and use of squeezable computers: an exploration of manipulative user interfaces. In Proc. of the Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (CHI), pp 18–23Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hassenzahl M (2004) The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Hum Comput Interact 19:319–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hassenzahl M, Sandweg N (2004) From mental effort to perceived usability: transforming experiences into summary assessments. In Proc. of the Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (CHI) extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. pp 1283–1286. doi: 10.1145/985921.986044]
  5. 5.
    Hassenzahl M, Ullrich D (2007) To do or not to do: differences in user experience and retrospective judgments depending on the presence of absence of instrumental goals. Interacting Comput 19:429–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.−8bl4DRLaIY (last checked on February, 25h 2016)
  8. 8. (last checked on February, 25th 2016)
  9. 9.
    Karapanos E, Hassenzahl M, Marten JB (2008) User experience over time. In Proc. of the conference on human-computer interaction (CHI) extended abstracts, pp 3561–3566Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karapanos E, Martens JB, Hassenzahl M (2012) Reconstructing experiences with iScale. Int J Hum Comput Stud 70(11):849–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karapanos E, Zimmerman J, Forlizzi J, Martens JB (2010) Measuring the dynamics of remembered experience over time. Interacting Comput 22(5):328–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kelley GA, Kelley KS (2010) Isometric handgrip exercise and resting blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hypertens 28(3):411–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kildal J, Paasovaara S, Aaltonen V (2012) Kinetic device: designing interactions with a deformable mobile interface. In Proc. of the CHI 2012. Extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (Austin, Texas, USA), pp 1871–1876Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kujala S, Roto V, Käänänen-Vainio-Mattila K, Sinnelä A (2011) Identifying hedonic factors in long-term user experience. In Proc. of the 2011 Conference on designing pleasurable products and interfaces. doi: 10.1145/2347504.2347523, pp 137–144
  15. 15.
    Marti P, Iacono I (2015) Evaluating the experience of use of a squeezable interface. In Proc. of the 11th Biannual conference on Italian SIGCHI chapter, Rome, (CHItaly). doi: 10.1145/2808435.2808461, pp 42–49
  16. 16.
    Marti P, Tittarelli M, Sirizzotti M, Stienstra J (2014) Expression rich communication through a squeezable device. In Proc. of the IEEE international conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics (BioRob), pp 536–541Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mendoza V, Novick D (2005) Usability over time. In Proc. of the special interest group on design of communication (SIGDOC), pp 151–158Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norman DA (2009) Memory is more important than actuality. Interactions, pp 24–26Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stienstra JT, Marti P (2013) Dreamy eyes: exploring dynamic expression in human-system interaction. In Proc. of Annual CHI conference on human factors in computing system (CHI), pp 595–600Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff M, Hassenzahl M, Platz A (2006) Dynamics of user experience: how the perceived quality of mobile phones changes over time. In user experience – towards a unified view, Workshop at the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp 74–78Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weinberg G, Gan S (2001) The Squeezables: Toward an Expressive and Interdependent Multi-Player Musical Instrument. Computer Music Journal. The MIT Press, 25(2):37–45Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Siena and Eindhoven University of TechnologySienaItaly
  2. 2.University of SienaSienaItaly

Personalised recommendations