User Experience Evaluation Methods: Lessons Learned from an Interactive TV Case-Study

  • Dimitri Drouet
  • Regina BernhauptEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9856)


Evaluating user experience (UX) is a complicated endeavour due to the multitude of existing factors, dimensions and concepts that all contribute to UX. We report lessons learned from conducting a user study that was adapted to not only evaluate usability but also several aspects of the user experience. In this study we evaluated some of the most important factors of user experience including aesthetics, emotions, meaning and value as well as naturalness. Based on these experiences we propose a set of possible improvements to enhance existing user study approaches. These improvements aim at incorporating a variety of methods to support the various aspects of user experience including all experiences before, during and after interaction with a product.


User experience Evaluation methods Aesthetics Emotion User-centered development process 


  1. 1.
    All about UX: all UX evaluation methods.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Bernhaupt, R. (ed.): Game User Experience Evaluation, p. 285. Springer, London (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bernhaupt, R., Palanque, P., Manciet, F., Martinie, C.: User-test results injection into task-based design process for the assessment and improvement of both usability and user experience. In: Bogdan, C., et al (eds.) HCSE 2016/HESSD 2016. LNCS, vol. 9856, pp. 56–72. Springer, Switzerland (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bernhaupt, R., Pirker, M.: Evaluating user experience for interactive television: towards the development of a domain-specific user experience questionnaire. In: Kotzé, P., Marsden, G., Lindgaard, G., Wesson, J., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8118, pp. 642–659. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ISO 9241-210 Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction - Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gegner, L., Runonen, M.: For what it is worth: anticipated experience evaluation. In: 8th International Conference on Design and Emotion, London, UK (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hagen, U.: Designing for player experience: how professional game developers communicate design visions. J. Gaming Virtual Worlds 3, 259–275 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, J.: User experience-a research agenda. Behav. Inf. Technol. 25(2), 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hassenzahl, M.: The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product. In: Blythe, M.A., Overbeeke, K., Monk, A.F., Wright, P.C. (eds.) Funology, pp. 31–42. Springer, Amsterdam (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jordan, P.: Designing Pleasurable Products. Taylor and Francis, London (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karapanos, E., Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Martens, J.-B.: Measuring the dynamics of remembered experience over time. Interact. Comput. 22, 328–335 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lazar, J., Feng, H.J., Hocheiser, H.: Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. Wiley, Chichester (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lehtonen, T.K.: The domestication of new technologies as a set of trials. J. Consum. Cult. 3(3), 363–385 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McCarthy, J., Wright, P.: Technology as experience. Interactions 11, 42–43 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRIT, ICS GroupToulouseFrance
  2. 2.RuwidoNeumarktAustria

Personalised recommendations