Advertisement

Guideline Definition for the Evaluation of Citizen Experience Using Urban Interfaces

  • Luis Carlos Aceves Gutiérrez
  • Jorge Martín-GutiérrezEmail author
  • Marta Sylvia del Rio Guerra
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11572)

Abstract

This paper presents fourteen useful guidelines to evaluate and determine how much does a digital interface in a public facility provide user experiences for citizens. In addition, it describes the partial outcomes of applying these guidelines to three urban interfaces in the city of Monterrey, Mexico. An ethnographic study was conducted to obtain preliminaries results where the user experience was assessed in these interfaces when applying the proper guidelines. The goal is to validate guidelines with global assessment methods to establish a protocol of design for urban interfaces; in other words, an application that provides the information required to design urban interfaces from point of view of UX. This extended ethnographic study will be implemented in different cities around the world and urban interfaces.

Keywords

Digital interfaces User experience Smart cities Interaction design Citizen-centered design Design principles and usability test 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Andrea Cortés, Alma Velázquez and Edgar Ramírez to their contribution to the heuristics, both in the revision of existing ones and the creation of new one, work done as undergraduates for their final project under the supervision of their thesis advisor, Marta Sylvia del Río at the Universidad de Monterrey.

References

  1. 1.
    Abbas, M.: Challenges in implementation of TVM (ticket vending machine) in developing countries for mass transport system: a study of human behavior while interacting with ticket vending machine-TVM. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2014. LNCS, vol. 8519, pp. 245–254. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07635-5_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Russo, P., Boor, S.: How fluent is your interface? Designing for international users. In: Proceedings of the INTERCHI ’93 on Human Factors in Computing Systems (INTERCHI 1993), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24–29 April 1993. IOS Press (1993). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=164943. Accessed 12 July 2017
  3. 3.
    Martinez Ballesteros, L.G., Alvarez, O., Markendahl, J.: Quality of experience (QoE) in the smart cities context: an initial analysis. In: 2015 IEEE First International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2), pp. 1–7 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ISC2.2015.7366222
  4. 4.
    Benouaret, K., Valliyur-Ramalingam, R., Charoy, F.: CrowdSC: building smart cities with large-scale citizen participation. IEEE Internet Comput. 17(6), 57–63 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2013.88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Castro, F., Silva, S.L., Barbará de Oliveira, S., Augusto, G.A.: Service desk software usability evaluation: the case of Brazilian National Cancer Institute. Proc. Comput. Sci. 100, 557–564 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Concilio, G., Marsh, J., Molinari, F., Rizzo, F.: Human smart cities: a new vision for redesigning urban community and citizen’s life. In: Skulimowski, A.M.J., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems: Recent Trends, Advances and Solutions. AISC, vol. 364, pp. 269–278. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19090-7_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Connell, I.: Full Principles Set. http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/i.connell/DocsPDF/PrinciplesSet.pdf. Accessed 12 July 2017
  8. 8.
    Flores, A., Velázquez, A., Ramirez, E.: Definicion y aplicacion de un instrumento de evaluacion de experiencia de uso de interfaces digitales urbanas dirigidas a ciudadanos. Universidad de Monterrey, San Pedro Garza García (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garcia, R., Dacko, S.: Design thinking for sustainability. In: Design Thinking. Wiley, Hoboken, pp. 381–400 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119154273.ch25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., Baptista Lucio, P.: Metodología de la investigación. McGraw-Hill. https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Metodología_de_la_investigación.html?id=wXMtSgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y. Accessed 12 July 2017
  11. 11.
    Insitituto de Biomecanica de Valencia.: Instituto de Biomecánica-ERGONOMÍA Y MUEBLE. Guía de recomendaciones para el diseño de mobiliario ergonómico (2017). http://www.ibv.org/publicaciones/catalogo-de-publicaciones/ergonomia-y-mueble-guia-de-recomendaciones-para-el-diseno-de-mobiliario-ergonomico. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  12. 12.
    Nielsen, J.: Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems-CHI ’92, pp. 373–380 (1992).  https://doi.org/10.1145/142750.142834
  13. 13.
    Nielsen, J., Molich, R.: Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Empowering People-CHI ’90, pp. 249–256 (1990).  https://doi.org/10.1145/97243.97281
  14. 14.
    Opromolla, A., Ingrosso, A., Volpi, V., Medaglia, C.M., Palatucci, M., Pazzola, M.: Gamification in a smart city context. An analysis and a proposal for its application in co-design processes. In: De Gloria, A. (ed.) GALA 2014. LNCS, vol. 9221, pp. 73–82. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22960-7_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prior, P.: Train Ticket Vending Machines: Designing for Usability (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosenfeld, L.: Bloug: Information Architecture Heuristics (2004). http://louisrosenfeld.com/home/bloug_archive/000286.html. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  17. 17.
    Sakamoto, M., Yoshii, A., Nakajima, T., Ikeuchi, K., Otsuka, T., Okada, K., Ishizawa, F., Kobayashi, A.: Human interaction issues in a digital-physical hybrid world. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems, Networks, and Applications, pp. 49–54 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1109/CPSNA.2014.17
  18. 18.
    Sanchez, J.: Psychological usability heuristics|UX magazine. In: UX Magazine (2011). http://uxmag.com/articles/psychological-usability-heuristics. Accessed 12 July 2017
  19. 19.
    Sandnes, F.: User interface design for public kiosks: an evaluation of the taiwan high speed rail ticket vending machine (PDF download available). J. Inf. Sci. Eng. pp. 307–321 (2010). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220587882_User_Interface_Design_for_Public_Kiosks_An_Evaluation_of_the_Taiwan_High_Speed_Rail_Ticket_Vending_Machine. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  20. 20.
    Suárez Torrente, M.C.: SIRIUS: Sistema de Evaluación de la Usabilidad Web Orientado al Usuario y basado en la Determinación de Tareas Críticas (2010). http://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/handle/10651/12866. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  21. 21.
    Bruce, T.: Bruce Tognazzini's Tog on Interface—Developing User Interfaces for Microsoft Windows. http://flylib.com/books/en/2.847.1.19/1/. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  22. 22.
    Verhoeff, N.: Urban interfaces: the cartographies of screen-based installations. Telev. N. Media 18(4), 305–319 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476416667818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Web Accesibility Initiative.: WAI Guidelines and Techniques|Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)|W3C (2015). https://www.w3.org/WAI/guid-tech. Accessed 12 Oct 2017
  24. 24.
    Weinschenk, S.: The Psychologist’s View of UX Design|UX Magazine. In: UX Magazine. https://uxmag.com/articles/the-psychologists-view-of-ux-design. Accessed 12 Oct 2017

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis Carlos Aceves Gutiérrez
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jorge Martín-Gutiérrez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marta Sylvia del Rio Guerra
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Universidad de La LagunaSan Critóbal de La LagunaSpain
  2. 2.Universidad de MonterreyMonterreyMexico

Personalised recommendations