Understanding the most satisfying and unsatisfying user experiences: Emotions, psychological needs, and context

The aim of this research was to study the structure of the most satisfying and unsatisfying user experiences in terms of experienced emotions, psychological needs, and contextual factors. 45 university students wrote descriptions of their most satisfying and unsatisfying recent user experiences and analyzed those experiences using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) method for experienced emotions, a questionnaire probing the salience of 10 psychological needs, and a self-made set of rating scales for analyzing context. The results suggested that it was possible to capture variations in user experiences in terms of experienced emotions, fulfillment of psychological needs, and context effectively by using psychometric rating scales. The results for emotional experiences showed significant differences in 16 out of 20 PANAS emotions between the most satisfying and unsatisfying experiences. The results for psychological needs indicated that feelings of autonomy and competence emerged as highly salient in the most satisfying experiences and missing in the unsatisfying experiences. High self-esteem was also notably salient in the most satisfying experiences. The qualitative results indicated that most of the participants' free-form qualitative descriptions, especially for the most unsatisfying user experiences, gave important information about the pragmatic aspects of the interaction, but often omitted information about hedonic and social aspects of user experience.

[1]  Anshu Agarwal,et al.  Beyond usability: evaluating emotional response as an integral part of the user experience , 2009, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[2]  Virpi Roto,et al.  Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach , 2009, CHI.

[3]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Affect: from information to interaction , 2005, Critical Computing.

[4]  A. Isen,et al.  Positive affect and decision making. , 1993 .

[5]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  User experience - a research agenda , 2006, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[6]  L. F. Barrett,et al.  Handbook of Emotions , 1993 .

[7]  P. Lang.  The emotion probe. Studies of motivation and attention. , 1995, The American psychologist.

[8]  Richard L. Hazlett,et al.  Measuring emotional valence to understand the user's experience of software , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[9]  Sarah Diefenbach,et al.  Needs, affect, and interactive products - Facets of user experience , 2010, Interact. Comput..

[10]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  User experience (UX): towards an experiential perspective on product quality , 2008, IHM '08.

[11]  Satu Jumisko-Pyykkö,et al.  Framing the Context of Use for Mobile HCI , 2010, Int. J. Mob. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[12]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[13]  Veikko Surakka,et al.  The effects of affective interventions in human-computer interaction , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[14]  Kennon M. Sheldon,et al.  What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[16]  D. Watson,et al.  Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

[18]  E. Vesterinen,et al.  Affective Computing , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[19]  Roy Rada,et al.  Interacting WITH Computers , 1989, Interact. Comput..

[20]  Kennon M. Sheldon,et al.  Daily Well-Being: The Role of Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness , 2000 .

[21]  Veikko Surakka,et al.  Real-time estimation of emotional experiences from facial expressions , 2006, Interact. Comput..

[22]  B. Nardi.  Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction , 1995 .

[23]  J. Henry,et al.  The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. , 2004, The British journal of clinical psychology.

[24]  E. Deci,et al.  Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[25]  A. Maslow.  A Theory of Human Motivation , 1943 .

[26]  Kraig Finstad,et al.  Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: evidence against 5-point scales , 2010 .

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

[28]  Michael Burmester,et al.  Hedonic and ergonomic quality aspects determine a software's appeal , 2000, CHI.

[29]  E. Deci,et al.  The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior , 2000 .

[30]  Veikko Surakka,et al.  Pupil size variation as an indication of affective processing , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[31]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Self-knowledge: its limits, value, and potential for improvement. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[32]  Timo Partala,et al.  The combined walkthrough: measuring behavioral, affective, and cognitive information in usability testing , 2009 .