The playful experiences (PLEX) framework as a guide for expert evaluation

The Playful Experiences (PLEX) framework is a categorization of playful experiences based on previous theoretical work on pleasurable experiences, game experiences, emotions, elements of play, and reasons why people play. While the framework has been successfully employed in design-related activities, its potential as an evaluation tool has not yet been studied. In this paper, we apply the PLEX framework in the evaluation of two game prototypes that explored novel physical interactions between mobile devices using Near-Field Communication, by means of three separate studies. Our results suggest that the PLEX framework provides anchor points for evaluators to reflect during heuristic evaluations. More broadly, the framework categories can be used as a checklist to assess different attributes of playfulness of a product or service.

[1]  M. Apter,et al.  Adult play : a reversal theory approach , 1991 .

[2]  Peter C. Wright,et al.  Funology: from usability to enjoyment , 2005 .

[3]  Staffan Björk,et al.  Patterns In Game Design , 2004 .

[4]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  MARC HASSENZAHL CHAPTER 3 The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between User and Product , 2003 .

[5]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  Applying the PLEX framework in designing for playfulness , 2011, DPPI.

[6]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Well-being : the foundations of hedonic psychology , 1999 .

[7]  Peta Wyeth,et al.  GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games , 2005, CIE.

[8]  Thomas W. Malone,et al.  What makes things fun to learn? heuristics for designing instructional computer games , 1980, SIGSMALL '80.

[9]  William V. Wright,et al.  A Theory of Fun for Game Design , 2004 .

[10]  Barry Berman,et al.  How to Delight Your Customers , 2005 .

[11]  Lieselotte van Leeuwen,et al.  Adult play, psychology and design , 2008, Digit. Creativity.

[12]  Robert Zubek,et al.  MDA : A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research , 2004 .

[13]  J. Moran-Ellis.  The ambiguity of play , 1998 .

[14]  Ernest A. Edmonds,et al.  A study in play, pleasure and interaction design , 2007, DPPI.

[15]  John Zimmerman,et al.  User experience over time: an initial framework , 2009, CHI.

[16]  R.I.A. Mercuri,et al.  Technology as Experience , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[17]  Richard Bartle,et al.  Designing Virtual Worlds , 2003 .

[18]  Martin Trautschold,et al.  Games and Fun , 2010 .

[19]  Eric Bergman,et al.  Information appliances and beyond : interaction design for consumer products , 2000 .

[20]  R. Oliver.  Customer delight: Foundations, findings, and managerial insight☆ , 1997 .

[21]  Andrew Sears,et al.  WHY WE PLAY: AFFECT AND THE FUN OF GAMES: Designing Emotions for Games, Entertainment Interfaces and Interactive Products , 2007 .

[22]  Gordon M. Burghardt,et al.  The Genesis of Animal Play , 2009 .

[23]  J Holopainen.  Play, games, and fun , 2008 .

[24]  Anthony D. Pellegrini,et al.  The Role of Play in Human Development , 2009 .

[25]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing for fun: how can we design user interfaces to be more fun? , 2004, INTR.

[26]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  PLEX Cards: a source of inspiration when designing for playfulness , 2010, Fun and Games '10.

[27]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Iterative user-interface design , 1993, Computer.

[28]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  The PLEX Cards and its techniques as sources of inspiration when designing for playfulness , 2013, Int. J. Arts Technol..

[29]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: The Experience of Play in Work and Games. , 1977 .

[30]  L. Tiger.  The Pursuit Of Pleasure , 1992 .

[31]  Sheelagh Carpendale,et al.  Sketching user experiences , 2012 .

[32]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces , 1990, CHI '90.

[33]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Beyond boredom and anxiety , 1975 .

[34]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Emotional design , 2004, UBIQ.