Advertisement

Iterative User Experience Evaluation of a User Interface for the Unification of TV Contents

  • Pedro AlmeidaEmail author
  • Jorge AbreuEmail author
  • Telmo SilvaEmail author
  • Enrickson Varsori
  • Eliza Oliveira
  • Ana Velhinho
  • Sílvia Fernandes
  • Rafael Guedes
  • Diogo Oliveira
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 813)

Abstract

One of the key components of the design and development process of a User Interface (UI) is the User Experience (UX) assessment. It guarantees that the product meets the users’ needs and provides the best interaction, while achieving usability goals and emotional reactions of motivation, arousal and dominance. In this scope, this paper describes the results driven from a User-Centered Design (UCD) methodology adopted in the development and evaluation of consecutive versions of semi-functional prototypes (of the UltraTV concept), with iterations that comprised an expert review and subsequent testing with users in a laboratory environment. This evaluation approach aims to achieve a proof of concept for the profile-based unification of traditional TV and Over-the-top contents offered in the same user interface. As an R&D project based on a partnership between the research field and the industry that aims to bring innovation to the interactive TV (iTV) domain, the UltraTV concept targets for the synergy between users and market interests. Despite the challenges of introducing an interface that unifies linear and nonlinear content in the same UI assuring the continuity of the UX contrary to the current app-based trend, the combined results from the experts’ review and the inLab tests demonstrate the relevance and desirability of the concept as a potential solution for the future of iTV. The presented results provide valuable insights for further stages of field trials with end users, as well as to prove the feasibility and user demand for the profile-based unification for the next TV generation.

Keywords

Interactive television Prototype evaluation User interface User experience Content unification 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper is a result of the UltraTV - UltraHD TV Application Ecosystem project (grant agreement no. 17738), funded by COMPETE 2020, Portugal 2020 and the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER). Authors are grateful to the project partners: Altice Labs and Instituto de Telecomunicações.

References

  1. 1.
    Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. Doubleday, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Interaction Design Foundation: The Basics of User Experience Design (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abreu, J., Almeida, P., Teles, B.: TV discovery & enjoy: a new approach to help users finding the right TV program to watch. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Conference on Interactive experiences for TV and online video, pp. 63–70. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vanattenhoven, J., Geerts, D.: Broadcast, video-on-demand, and other ways to watch television content: a household perspective. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video, pp. 1–10. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vanattenhoven, J., Geerts, D.: Designing TV recommender interfaces for specific viewing experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video, pp. 185–190. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gonçalves, D., Costa, M., Couto, F.M.: A large-scale characterization of user behavior in cable TV. In: 3rd Workshop on Recommendation Systems for Television and Online Video (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abreu, J., Nogueira, J., Becker, V., Cardoso, B.: Survey of Catch-Up TV and other time-shift services: a comprehensive analysis and taxonomy of linear and nonlinear television. Telecommun. Syst. 64, 57–74 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cardoso, B., de Carvalho, F.: Trends in TV: OTT, Apps, Ads. Homepage http://www.alticelabs.com/content/07_TV.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov 2017
  9. 9.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N.: User experience - a research agenda. Behav. Inf. Technol. 25, 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Law, E.L.-C.: The measurability and predictability of user experience. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems - EICS 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    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. LNCS, vol. 8118, pp. 642–659. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40480-1_45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO 9241-210, Ergonomics of Human–System Interaction – Part 210: Humancentred Design for Interactive Systems (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    User Experience (n.d.). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_experience. Accessed 22 Nov 2017
  14. 14.
    Demetriadis, S., Karoulis, A., Pombortsis, A.: “Graphical” Jogthrough: expert based methodology for user interface evaluation, applied in the case of an educational simulation interface. Comput. Educ. 32, 285–299 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jin, J., Geng, Q., Zhao, Q., Zhang, L.: Integrating the trend of research interest for reviewer assignment. In: International WWW Conference, pp. 1233–1241 (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rohrer, C.P., Boyle, F., Wendt, J., Sauro, J., Cole, S.: Practical usability ratings by experts: a pragmatic approach for scoring product usability. In: CHI 2016, vol. 38, pp. 333–358 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abreu, J., Almeida, P., Silva, T.: A UX evaluation approach for second-screen applications. In: Abásolo, M., Perales, F., Bibiloni, A. (eds.) Applications and Usability of Interactive TV, vol. 605, pp. 105–120. Springer, Cham (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brooke, J.: SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Weerdmeester, P.W., Thomas, P.W., McLelland, I.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor and Francis, London (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martins, A., Rosa, A., Queirós, A., Silva, A., Rocha, N.P.: European Portuguese validation of the usability scale (SUS). In: 6th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing, pp. 293–300 (1996, 2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J. Behav. Ther. Exper. Psychiatry 25(1), 49–59 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Almeida, P., Abreu, J., Oliveira, E., Velhinho, A.: Proceedings of 6th Iberoamerican Conference on Applications and Usability for Interactive TV, pp. 59–70. University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nielsen, J.: Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users (2000). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/. Accessed 22 Nov 2017
  23. 23.
    Nielsen, J.: How Many Test Users in a Usability Study? https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-many-test-users/. Accessed 22 Nov 2012

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CIC.DIGITAL/Digimedia, Department of Communication and ArtsUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations