The UX White Paper, states that “ UX may change when the context changes, even if the system does not change” (p. The majority of UX models, whether theoretical or more pragmatic, include the context of use as one of the main factors impacting UX. Traditional User-Centred Design, another deep root of UX, also relies on the requirement to “ understand and specify the context of use”. Situated action which focuses on the understanding of human acts in context, is one of them. The results of a UX survey conducted in 2008 and replicated in 2012, confirm this observation by showing that UX professionals mainly agree on the fact that “ UX occurs in and is dependent on the context in which the artefact is experienced”.įrom a theoretical point of view, UX is contextual per nature: the field of UX emerged out of several theories highlighting the essential role of the context. User experiences, being specific categories of experiences “derived from encountering systems”, are no exceptions to this rule. An experience, whatever form it takes, is indeed inevitably embedded in a specific setting and should therefore be considered as “coloured” by a specific context. The paper concludes with the implications of this research for UX evaluation.Īccording to the Oxford dictionary, context is generally defined as ‘ the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood’. (c) Through this case study, we also provide an illustrative analysis of the links between contextual factors and UX. We describe the validation of the UXCS through an online study involving 137 participants. Our contribution is threefold: (a) we review and discuss theories on the notion of context and its underlying dimensions (b) we introduce the UX Context Scale (UXCS) and the rationale behind its development. The present study attempts to address this challenge. Understanding and assessing the influence of contextual factors in UX thus remains a crucial endeavour for the design of interactive products. However, since online UX studies become a widespread tool, a measure of perceived context “quality” grows even more important. One may argue that this dimension is studied upstream of a project, with more qualitative methodologies (e.g., contextual inquiry or design probes) or through sensor technology.
While UX assessment questionnaires tend to focus on the perceived qualities of a product or system, or the emotions triggered, little attention is paid to the explicit measure of both objective and perceived context of use. Numerous studies have evaluated interactive systems in specific contexts of use, thereby showing what challenges are set by these contextual factors for the interaction. The “situatedness of action” and the acknowledgment of a close interaction between action and situation during the interaction with technology contribute to highlight the central role played by the context. Classically considered as a crucial factor in the fields of Ergonomics and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), the notion of context is almost always mentioned in UX frameworks or models. Following this common understanding, Hassenzahl and Tractinsky define UX as: “A consequence of a user's internal state (predispositions, expectations, needs, motivation, mood, etc.), the characteristics of the designed system (e.g., complexity, purpose, usability, functionality, etc.) and the context (or the environment) within which the interaction occurs (e.g., organizational/social setting, meaningfulness of the activity, voluntariness of use, etc.)” (p. Even if no clear consensus has been reached on the definition of UX, UX researchers and practitioners agree on the three classical pillars influencing UX: the user, the system and the context. User experience (UX) is commonly described as the holistic quality of the interaction between a user and an interactive system.
0 kommentar(er)
