The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products

Two studies considered the interplay between user-perceived usability (i.e., pragmatic attributes), hedonic attributes (e.g., stimulation, identification), goodness (i.e., satisfaction), and beauty of 4 different MP3-player skins. As long as beauty and goodness stress the subjective valuation of a product, both were related to each other. However, the nature of goodness and beauty was found to differ. Goodness depended on both perceived usability and hedonic attributes. Especially after using the skins, perceived usability became a strong determinant of goodness. In contrast, beauty largely depended on identification; a hedonic attribute group, which captures the product's ability to communicate important personal values to relevant others. Perceived usability as well as goodness was affected by experience (i.e., actual usability, usability problems), whereas hedonic attributes and beauty remained stable over time. All in all, the nature of beauty is rather self-oriented than goal-oriented, whereas goodness relates to both.

[1]  Hans-Werner Gellersen,et al.  Guest editorial: Handheld CSCW: Personal technologies for collaboration , 1999, Personal Technologies.

[2]  Masaaki Kurosu,et al.  Apparent usability vs. inherent usability: experimental analysis on the determinants of the apparent usability , 1995, CHI 95 Conference Companion.

[3]  K. Scherer,et al.  Handbook of affective sciences. , 2003 .

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

[5]  U. Rudolph,et al.  Aesthetic design - just an add on? , 1999, HCI.

[6]  David Chek Ling Ngo,et al.  Application of an aesthetic evaluation model to data entry screens , 2001, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[8]  E. Berscheid,et al.  What is beautiful is good. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  Marc Hassenzahl.  Prioritizing usability problems: Data-driven and judgement-driven severity estimates , 2000, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[10]  Stephan Wensveen,et al.  Augmenting fun and beauty: a pamphlet , 2000, DARE '00.

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

[12]  Allen F. Wood,et al.  Beauty , 1911, The Artist’s Reality.

[13]  E. Goldstein.  Sensation and perception, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[14]  S. Schwartz,et al.  Toward A Universal Psychological Structure of Human Values , 1987 .

[15]  Deborah A. Prentice,et al.  Psychological Correspondence of Possessions, Attitudes, and Values , 1987 .

[16]  A. Eagly,et al.  What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. , 1991 .

[17]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

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

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

[20]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace1 , 1992 .

[21]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  The respective roles of perceived usefulness and perceived fun in the acceptance of microcomputer technology , 1994, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[22]  Chauncey E. Wilson,et al.  The Usability Engineering Framework for Product Design and Evaluation , 1997 .

[23]  Karen Wilson,et al.  Evaluating images of virtual agents , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[24]  P. Jordan.  Designing Pleasurable Products: An Introduction to the New Human Factors , 2000 .

[25]  Edward A. Silver,et al.  Looks good to me , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[26]  H. Bastian.  Sensation and Perception.—I , 1869, Nature.

[27]  K. Eilers,et al.  Entwicklung und Überprüfung einer Skala zur Erfassung subjektiv erlebter Anstrengung , 1986 .

[28]  D. Berlyne.  Curiosity and exploration. , 1966, Science.

[29]  Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals ( VDTs ) — Part 11 : Guidance on usability , 1998 .

[30]  R. Zajonc.  Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

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

[32]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The Effect of Perceived Hedonic Quality on Product Appealingness , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

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

[34]  Richard,et al.  Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace , 2022 .

[35]  Albert G. Arnold.  Mental effort and evaluation of user-interfaces: a questionnaire approach , 1999, HCI.

[36]  John P. Sheposh,et al.  Beauty or Brains: Which Image for Your Mate? , 1977 .

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

[38]  Michael Burmester,et al.  AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität , 2003, MuC.

[39]  Andrew Ortony,et al.  The Cognitive Structure of Emotions , 1988 .

[40]  Stephen W. Draper,et al.  Analysing fun as a candidate software requirement , 1999, Personal Technologies.

[41]  Robert J. Logan,et al.  Design of Simplified Television Remote Controls: A Case for Behavioral and Emotional Usability , 1994, CHI 1994.

[42]  Peter M. Gollwitzer,et al.  Symbolic self-completion , 1982 .

[43]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The importance of a software's pragmatic quality depends on usage modes , 2002 .

[44]  Anamaria de Moraes,et al.  The lack of usability in design icons: an affective case Study about Juicy Salif , 2003, DPPI '03.

[45]  Norbert Mundorf,et al.  Effects of hedonic components and user's gender on the acceptance of screen-based information services , 1993, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[46]  Laura M. Leventhal,et al.  Assessing user interfaces for diverse user groups: Evaluation strategies and defining characteristics , 1996, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[47]  David Frohlich,et al.  Guest editorial: Computers and fun , 2005, Personal Technologies.

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

[49]  William W. Gaver,et al.  Alternatives: exploring information appliances through conceptual design proposals , 2000, CHI.

[50]  Andrew F. Monk,et al.  Computers and fun , 1999, Pers. Ubiquitous Comput..

[51]  Ivo Düntsch,et al.  The IsoMetrics usability inventory: An operationalization of ISO 9241-10 supporting summative and formative evaluation of software systems , 1999, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[52]  Nigel Hallett.  Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics , 2004 .

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