Groups of users, Random sample (on street), Other • Product development phase: Early concepting, Nonfunctional prototypes, Functional prototypes, Ready products • What kind of experience is studied: Momentary (e. g. emotion), Use case (task, episode), Long-term (relationship with the product) • Collected data type: Quantitative, Qualitative • Domain-specific or general: General, For Web services, For PC software, For mobile software, For hardware designs, Other • Resources in evaluation: Needs trained moderator, Not much training needed, Needs special equipment, Can be done remotely, Typical effort in man days (min-max)
The participants could fill in more than one method template. They could check multiple choices and we asked them also to mark whether the reported method comes from industry or academia. The participants formed groups of 4-6 people to enable discussion on the methods that the group members knew or had been using. For sharing the collection of methods in the plenary we first had a quick presentation round of the most important UX method per group and then put all collected method templates on an interactive wall. The SIG participants interacted with the other participants via post-it notes attached to the method descriptions.
After the session, we transcribed the forms and distributed them to the participants for enabling further clarifications. RESULTS FROM THE SIG In the SIG, 33 UX evaluation methods were identified. Three methods were clearly investigating merely usability or non-experiential aspects of the system, which left us 30 methods for further analysis. Half of the methods were reported to be academic and the other half industrial. 15 methods could provide means for evaluating also the experiential aspects, but the method was either not primarily foreseen for producing experiential data or we could not tell this from the given method description.
The Essay on Factors Affecting Group Development
– This is the ability to persuade the group member to change and reflect the leadership style. Authoritarian leaders predominate compliant and dependent members Democrat leaders Persuade more active involvement Environment Physical factors ( space, temperature, seating arrangement) Space/room (location and set up, e.g. Lighting & ventilation, seating arrangement) Emotional factors ( ...
