Children and 'smart' technologies: can children's experiences be interpreted and coded?

This paper has a focus on young children and their emerging new technologies. It examines children's drawings as an evaluation tool for capturing their experiences of different novel interfaces. A recent evaluation study with children and two follow-up expert coding sessions were used to demonstrate how drawings could be used and coded and how the intercoder reliability could be improved. Usability and User Experience (UX) factors: Fun (F), Goal Fit (GF) and Tangible Magic (TM) were included in the coding scheme and they were the factors that have been looked at in the coding sessions. Our studies show the thoroughness and ease-of-use of the drawing method. The method was effective and reliable in conveying the user experience form the drawings. It also shows some of the limitation of the method: e.g. resource intensive and open to evaluator's interpretation. From the result of the study, a number of the drawings conveyed information pertaining to user experiences: F, GF and TM, and the method was particularly reliable at capturing fun. The result also led to the correlation found on the GF and TM.

[1]  Kim Halskov,et al.  Real life experiences with experience design , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[2]  Lauralee Alben,et al.  Quality of experience: defining the criteria for effective interaction design , 1996, INTR.

[3]  Ian McClelland.  'User experience' design a new form of design practice takes shape , 2005, CHI EA '05.

[4]  Charlotte Wiberg,et al.  A Measure of Fun: Extending the scope of web usability , 2003 .

[5]  Panos Markopoulos,et al.  Sampling young children's experiences with cultural probes , 2008, IDC.

[6]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  Understanding experience in interactive systems , 2004, DIS '04.

[7]  Phoebe Sengers,et al.  Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation , 2006, DIS '06.

[8]  Aaron Marcus,et al.  Fun! fun! fun! in the user experience we just wanna have fun...don't we? , 2007, Interactions.

[9]  Ann MacPhail,et al.  The use of drawings as an evaluative tool: students' experiences of sport education , 2004 .

[10]  Jarmo Laaksolahti,et al.  Evaluating experience-focused HCI , 2007, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[11]  Pearl Denham.  Nine- to fourteen-year-old children's conception of computers using drawings , 1993, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[12]  Janet C. Read,et al.  Evaluation of Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) for and with Children - Methods and Challenges , 2007, HCI.

[13]  Berry Eggen,et al.  Key issues for the successful design of an intelligent, interactive playground , 2008, IDC.

[14]  J. Read,et al.  Endurability, Engagement and Expectations: Measuring Children’s Fun , 2002 .

[15]  Franca Garzotto,et al.  Broadening children's involvement as design partners: from technology to , 2008, IDC.

[16]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  Shaping experiences in the hunt museum: a design case study , 2004, DIS '04.

[17]  Alissa Nicole Antle,et al.  Are tangibles more fun?: comparing children's enjoyment and engagement using physical, graphical and tangible user interfaces , 2008, TEI.