Over the last decade, ‘user experience’ (UX) became a buzzword in the field of human – computer interaction (HCI) and interaction design. As technology matured, interactive products became not only more useful and usable, but also fashionable, fascinating things to desire. Driven by the impression that a narrow focus on interactive products as tools does not capture the variety and emerging aspects of technology use, practitioners and researchers alike, seem to readily embrace the notion of UX as a viable alternative to traditional HCI. And, indeed, the term promises change and a fresh look, without being too specific about its definite meaning. The present introduction to the special issue on ‘Empirical studies of the user experience’ attempts to give a provisional answer to the question of what is meant by ‘the user experience’. It provides a cursory sketch of UX and how we think UX research will look like in the future. It is not so much meant as a forecast of the future, but as a proposal – a stimulus for further UX research.

/pdf/user-experience-a-research-agenda-hedarvm89l.pdf

User experience - a research agenda

This chapter described the initial version of PrEmo (PrEmo1) that was introduced in 2002. Since its introduction, PrEmo1 was used to measure emotions evoked by a wide variety of products and other designed stimuli, such as wheelchairs (Desmet and Dijkhuis in Proceedings of the international conference on designing pleasurable products and interfaces. ACM publishing, New York, 2003), automotive design (Desmet and Hekkert in Automotive mechatronics design and engineering. ISATA, Dusseldorf, Germany, 1998), mobile phones (Desmet et al. in J Knowl Technol Policy, 20(3):141–155, 2007), airplane meals, and functional fragrances (Desmet and Schifferstein in Product innovation toolbox: a field guide to consumer understanding and research, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2012), serving both as a means for generating insights for new product conceptualization and as a means for evaluating the emotional impact of new design concepts.

Measuring emotion: development and application of an instrument to measure emotional responses to products

In this paper, we present a novel multi-touch gesture-based authentication technique. We take advantage of the multi-touch surface to combine biometric techniques with gestural input. We defined a comprehensive set of five-finger touch gestures, based upon classifying movement characteristics of the center of the palm and fingertips, and tested them in a user study combining biometric data collection with usability questions. Using pattern recognition techniques, we built a classifier to recognize unique biometric gesture characteristics of an individual. We achieved a 90% accuracy rate with single gestures, and saw significant improvement when multiple gestures were performed in sequence. We found user ratings of a gestures desirable characteristics (ease, pleasure, excitement) correlated with a gestures actual biometric recognition rate - that is to say, user ratings aligned well with gestural security, in contrast to typical text-based passwords. Based on these results, we conclude that multi-touch gestures show great promise as an authentication mechanism.

http://katherineinterface.com/napachi.pdf

Biometric-rich gestures: a novel approach to authentication on multi-touch devices

When a Car Makes You Smile: Development and Application of an Instrument to Measure Product Emotions

This paper introduces a conceptual model for the process underlying emotional responses that result from the perception of consumer products. The model distinguishes different kinds of emotions on the basis of eliciting conditions. It is based on the presumption that all emotional reactions result from an appraisal process in which the individual appraises the product as favouring or harming one or several of his concerns. In this process of appraisal, the personal concern gives the stimulus emotional relevance. The model describes the various ways in which products can act as emotional stimuli and the matching concerns that can either correspond or collide with these stimuli. Products can act as stimuli in three different ways: the product as such, the product (or designer) as an agent, and the products as a promise for future usage or ownership. The corresponding concerns that are addressed are respectively: attitudes, standards, and goals. By revealing the cognitive basis of product emotions, the model can be used to explain the nature and, often, mixed character of product emotions. The paper illustrates a possible application of the model in a tool for designers. INTRODUCTION After being neglected for many years, a sudden interest in product affect has emerged. The affective side of product experience has become a ‘hot topic’, which is probably best illustrated by this conference and similar events over the past few years (e.g., Overbeeke & Hekkert, 1999). A difficulty of affective concepts such as pleasure and emotion is that they are probably as intangible as they are appealing. Although some interesting and promising studies have been reported, the research field is still short of conceptual clarity and therefore lacks consensus on what the actual subject of study should be. In fact, both the concepts of pleasure and emotion are somewhat undifferentiated, they are used as collective nouns for all kinds of affective phenomena. Design literature tends to refer to these when studying anything that is so-called intangible, non-functional, non-rational, or, for that matter, non-cognitive. Some of the reported studies involve ‘experiential needs’ (Holbrook, 1982), ‘affective responses’ (Derbaix & Pham, 1991), ‘emotional benefits’ (Desmet, Tax & Overbeeke, 2000), ‘customer delight’ (Burns, Barrett & Evans, 2000) and ‘pleasure’ (Jordan & Servaes, 1995). Naturally, it is inherent to any newly emerging research field that the emulsion has not even started to crystallise. On the other hand, an adequate definition of the subject of study would probably facilitate fruitful discussions between researchers. In our view, a model of product emotions can help to get a grip on the concept of product pleasure and emotions. This paper introduces such a structured model that distinguishes different kind of product emotions on the basis of their eliciting conditions. The model adheres to the cognitive (functional) view on emotions and finds its roots in a structure developed by Ortony, Clore and Collins (1988). A first step in developing the model is to Desmet, P.M.A., & Hekkert, P. (2002). The basis of product emotions. In: W. Green and P. Jordan (Eds.), Pleasure with Products, beyond usability (60-68). London: Taylor & Francis. clarify the relationship between the concepts of pleasure and emotion. PLEASURE AND EMOTIONS The concept of affect refers to a large variety of psychological states such as emotions, feelings, moods, sentiments, and passions. Each of these affective states varies in duration, impact and eliciting conditions. Of these states, emotions are most relevant for product experience because only they imply a one-to-one relationship between the affective state and a particular object: one is afraid of something, angry at someone, happy about something, and so on (Frijda, 1986). The other affective states, such as feelings and moods, do not involve a specific object. For example, a moody person will find it difficult to pinpoint the exact cause of his mood. In the study of affective reactions to products, the object, i.e., the product, is the starting-point. Subsequently, the model of product affect presented in this paper focuses specifically on emotions. The place of pleasure in emotions is debatable. Both the propositions that pleasure is an emotion, and that it is not, are defensible. On the one hand, pleasure is an emotion if it is merely used as an equivalent of ‘fun’ or ‘enjoyment’. In this connotation pleasure is included in many of the taxonomies of emotions found in literature (e.g., Russell & Lanius, 1984). On the other hand, this view on pleasure seems to be rather narrow for the current application. Design research literature refers to pleasure as a product benefit that exceeds just proper functioning. In other words, pleasure is an emotional benefit that supplements product functionality. In this sense, pleasure covers all pleasant emotional reactions, of which the experience of fun is just one example. Valence (a bipolar ranging from pleasant to unpleasant) is a dimension frequently discovered in scaling procedures of emotion terms. If pleasure is regarded as a dimension of emotions, it can be used to describe emotions, but it is not an emotion as such. This notion befits everyday experience: one never feels pleasant as such. One feels happy, cheerful, surprised, inspired, etc. Although each of these emotions might be pleasant, that does not make pleasantness an emotion. Therefore, in the light of this paper, pleasure is defined as any pleasant emotional response elicited by product design. It might seem difficult, if not impossible, to find general relationships between product appearance and emotional responses because emotions are essentially personal. Nevertheless, although people differ in their emotional responses to products, general rules can be identified in the underlying process of emotion eliciting. A view that distinguishes such general rules is the cognitive view on emotions. THEORY OF EMOTION The cognitive, functionalist position on emotions posits that emotions serve an adaptive purpose. In this view, emotions are considered the mechanisms that signal when events are favourable or harmful to one’s concerns. This implies that in each emotion-eliciting stimulus some concern can be identified. These concerns are more or less stable preferences for certain states of the world; they are our personal motives in life (Frijda, 1986). Examples of human concerns are concerns for respect, safety, and self-esteem. For instance, we all have the concern of being treated with the respect we believe we deserve. When a person receives a degrading comment from a colleague, he will probably find this event conflicting with this concern for respect. Consequently, this person will experience a negative emotion such as shame or anger. The preceding example illustrates that the linking of the stimulus to the concern precedes the actual emotional response. This process of ‘signalling the emotional relevancy of an event’ is most commonly conceptualised as ‘a process of Desmet, P.M.A., & Hekkert, P. (2002). The basis of product emotions. In: W. Green and P. Jordan (Eds.), Pleasure with Products, beyond usability (60-68). London: Taylor & Francis. appraisal’ (e.g., Arnold, 1960; Frijda, 1986). Appraisal theories assert that it is not events per se that determine emotional responses, but evaluations and interpretations of events. Because emotions are intentional and essentially involve concerns, they seem to require an explanation that invokes these concerns. Moreover, as this paper focuses on emotions specifically elicited by products, the explanation should also include eliciting conditions. A good starting point for a model of product emotions is the model developed by Ortony et al. (1988) because it particularly focuses on this relationship between different types of concerns and the eliciting conditions. stimulus concern appraisal product as object attitude appealingness product as agent (action of) standard praiseworthyness product as event goal desirability Figure 1: Model of product emotions MODEL OF PRODUCT EMOTIONS According to the cognitive model of Ortony et al. (1988) there are three major aspects of the world we can focus on: events, agents, or objects. We focus on events (e.g., a football match) for their consequences (e.g., loss of your favourite team), we focus on agents (e.g., a dog) for their actions (e.g., barking at you), and we focus on objects (e.g., a painting) because we are interested in certain properties of them as such (e.g., its composition). Central to Ortony et al’s view is the position that emotions are valenced reactions to one of these perspectives on the world. Based on this division they developed a structure of emotion types that are logically related to one of these three aspects. In focusing on product emotions, at first side, it may seem tempting to restrict ourselves to the third class ‘products as objects’. Our major claim is however that all three perspectives are relevant when products are simply perceived with one of our senses, i.e., without requiring physical interaction with the product. What we will present here is an adjusted version of the original model in which those elements are adopted that cover emotions that may result from product perception. This adapted model is presented in Figure 1. Figures 2, 3, and 4 each show examples of one of the three classes of product emotions. Products as objects To start with the most obvious and simple branch of the structure in Figure 1, products are objects. Like all objects, products, or aspects of products, can be viewed as such in terms of their appealingness. Products are simply liked or disliked for their appearance, for the way they look. The emotional reactions are basically unstructured and comprise attraction emotions such as love, attracted-to, disgust, and boredom. attitude appealingness product as objec

The basis of product emotions

In this paper, a design approach is introduced for designing products with added emotional value. First, the approach was established, based on a theoretical framework and a non-verbal instrument to measure emotional responses. Second, the value of the design approach was assessed by applying it to the design of mobile telephones. Mobile telephones were found to be useful vehicles as people appear to have strong feelings about this product. A user study was conducted which resulted in the identification of two user groups (‘trend followers' and ‘security seekers') and for each group an emotional profile. Four telephones were designed which, for each group, either were intended to or were not intended to match the group's profile. Finally, these designs were evaluated with the non-verbal instrument. The results indicate that the approach is appropriate for designing products with added emotional value. The advantages and disadvantages of the approach are discussed and further research directions indicated.

C.J. Overbeeke

Papers

Designing products with added emotional value : development and application of an approach for research through design