The Adoption of Physiological Measures as an Evaluation Tool in UX

  • Vanessa GeorgesEmail author
  • François Courtemanche
  • Sylvain Sénécal
  • Pierre-Majorique Léger
  • Lennart Nacke
  • Romain Pourchon
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10293)


One of the challenges associated with the use of physiological signals as an evaluation tool in measuring user experience (UX) is their reduced usefulness when they are not specifically associated with user behavior. To address this challenge, we have developed a new evaluation tool which contextualizes users’ physiological and behavioral signals while interacting with a system. We have conducted interviews with 11 UX practitioners, from various industries, to evaluate the usefulness of our tool. Through these interviews we gained a better understanding of the challenges facing industry practitioners when using physiological measures and assessed the functionalities provided by our tool.


User experience Interface design Heatmaps Eyetracking Physiological computing Cognitive load Affective computing 



Authors want to thank Brendan Scully for manuscript revision and the UX practitioners who participated to this study This research was supported by NSERC (National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada).


  1. 1.
    Smith, T.F., Waterman, M.S.: Identification of common molecular subsequences. J. Mol. Biol. 147, 195–197 (1981). doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(81)90087-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhihong, Z., Pantic, M., Roisman, G.I., Huang, T.S.: A Survey of Affect Recognition Methods: Audio, Visual, and Spontaneous Expressions. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 31(1), 39–58 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calvo, R.A., D’Mello, S.: Affect detection: an interdisciplinary review of models, methods, and their applications. IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput. 1(1), 18–37 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Georges, V., Courtemanche, F., Sénécal, S., Baccino, T., Fredette, M., Léger, P.M.: (Forthcoming). UX heatmaps: mapping user experience on visual interfaces. In: 34rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N.: User experience-a research agenda. Behav. Inf. Technol. 25(2), 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roto, V., Vermeeren, A.P.O.S., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., Law, E., Obrist, M.: Course notes: user experience evaluation methods - which method to choose? In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (Paris, France). ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zaman, B., Shrimpton-Smith, T.: The FaceReader: measuring instant fun of use. In: Proceedings of the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Changing Roles, pp. 457–460. ACM, Oslo (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boucsein, W.: Electrodermal Activity. Springer, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huisman, G., van Hout, M., van Dijk, E., van der Geest, T., Heylen, D.: LEMtool: measuring emotions in visual interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 351–360. ACM, Paris (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mirza-Babaei, P., Nacke, L.E., Gregory, J., Collins, N., Fitzpatrick, G.: How does it play better?: exploring user testing and biometric storyboards in games user research. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2013), pp. 1499–1508. ACM, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., Koller, F.: AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualitat (AttracDiff: A questionnaire to measure perceived hedonic and pragmatic quality). In: Ziegler, J., Szwillus, G. (eds.), Mensch & Computer 2003. Interaktion in Bewegung, pp. 187–196. B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, Leipzig (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Courtemanche, F., Léger, P.-M., Frédette, M., Sénécal, S., Georges, V., Dufresne, A.: Method and Product for Visualizing the Emotions of a User, Provisional patent application. US 62/121,552, p. 14 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Virpi, R., et al.: All about UX (2012).
  14. 14.
    Riedl, R., Léger, P.-M.: Fundamentals of NeuroIS. Springer, Berlin (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kivikangas, M., Nacke, L., Ravaja, N.: Developing a triangulation system for digital game events, observational video, and psychophysiological data to study emotional responses to a virtual character. Entertainment Comput. 2(1), 11–16 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dix, A., et al.: Human-computer interaction. Pearson Education (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vanessa Georges
    • 1
    Email author
  • François Courtemanche
    • 1
  • Sylvain Sénécal
    • 1
  • Pierre-Majorique Léger
    • 1
  • Lennart Nacke
    • 2
  • Romain Pourchon
    • 1
  1. 1.HEC MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations