Economic and subjective measures of the perceived value of aesthetics and usability

The assessment of the relative value of different design features for users is of great interest for software designers. Users' evaluations are generally measured through questionnaires. We suggest that other evaluation methods, including economic measures, may provide different estimates of the relative value of features. In a laboratory experiment we created four versions of a data-entry application by independently manipulating the system's usability and aesthetics. Users' evaluations of the four experimental systems were obtained in a within-subjects design. In addition, five between-subjects experimental conditions were created, based on the evaluation method (questionnaire alone or auction and questionnaire), monetary incentives (present or absent), and experience in using the system (present or absent). In questionnaire-based responses, the systems' usability affected evaluations of usability as well as aesthetics. Similarly, the systems' aesthetics affected evaluations of both aesthetics and usability. Questionnaire-based evaluations of usability and aesthetics were not affected by experience with the system or by monetary performance incentives. Auction bids were only influenced by the system's usability: bids corresponded to the objective performance levels that could be attained with the different systems. The results suggest that by using economic methods, researchers and practitioners can obtain system evaluations that are strongly related to performance criteria and that may be more valid when the evaluation context favors task-oriented performance.

[1]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Measuring usability: preference vs. performance , 1994, CACM.

[2]  Jason F. Shogren,et al.  Consumer Preferences for Food Irradiation: How Favorable and Unfavorable Descriptions Affect Preferences for Irradiated Pork in Experimental Auctions , 2002 .

[3]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[4]  Erik Frekjmr,et al.  Measuring Usability: Are Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Satisfaction Really Correlated? , 2000 .

[5]  Amy L. Parsons,et al.  Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things , 2006 .

[6]  P. Fishwick Exploring Attributes of Skins as Potential Antecedents of Emotion in Hci , 2006 .

[7]  J. Karat Beyond task completion: evaluation of affective components of use , 2002 .

[8]  Bo N. Schenkman,et al.  Aesthetics and preferences of web pages , 2000, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[9]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Emotion & design: attractive things work better , 2002, INTR.

[10]  Noam Tractinsky,et al.  A Few Notes on the Study of Beauty in HCI , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[11]  Hans van der Heijden,et al.  Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in The Netherlands , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[12]  A. Roth,et al.  Last Minute Bidding and the Rules for Ending Second-Price Auctions: Theory and Evidence from a Natural Experiment on the Internet , 2000 .

[13]  J. Kagel,et al.  Auctions: A Survey of Experimental Research, 1995 - 2008* , 2008 .

[14]  Noam Tractinsky,et al.  Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites , 2004 .

[15]  Gitte Lindgaard,et al.  Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! , 2006, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[16]  J. Shogren,et al.  Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept , 1997 .

[17]  F. Jacob Seagull,et al.  Where Human Factors Meets Marketing , 1996 .

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

[19]  V. Smith,et al.  INCENTIVES AND BEHAVIOR IN ENGLISH, DUTCH AND SEALED‐BID AUCTIONS , 1980 .

[20]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Auctions and Bidding: A Primer , 1989 .

[21]  N. Tractinsky,et al.  What is beautiful is usable , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[22]  P. Jordan Human factors for pleasure in product use. , 1998, Applied ergonomics.

[23]  Gitte Lindgaard,et al.  What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? , 2003, Interact. Comput..

[24]  D. Norman Emotional design : why we love (or hate) everyday things , 2004 .

[25]  William Vickrey,et al.  Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders , 1961 .

[26]  Louise T. Su Value of Search Results as a Whole as the Best Single Measure of Information Retrieval Performance , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[27]  R. Hogarth,et al.  BEHAVIORAL DECISION THEORY: PROCESSES OF JUDGMENT AND CHOICE , 1981 .

[28]  Noam Tractinsky,et al.  Aesthetics and apparent usability: empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues , 1997, CHI.