A Comparative Analysis of User Experience of the Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Moodle E-Learning Platforms

Zdenko Dezelak, S. Parusheva, Anjana Ashok, S. Bobek, Simona Sternad Zabukovšek
{"title":"A Comparative Analysis of User Experience of the Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Moodle E-Learning Platforms","authors":"Zdenko Dezelak, S. Parusheva, Anjana Ashok, S. Bobek, Simona Sternad Zabukovšek","doi":"10.18690/um.epf.5.2022.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lately, user experience (UX) has become an important and frequently used approach to determine the perception of digital products and services. UX measures what users feel and sense directly while getting to know and using these products and services regularly. In this study, which was conducted in Slovenia and in Bulgaria, we have researched the UX of students related to the Microsoft Teams (MS Teams), Google Meet and Moodle e-learning platforms. We used a standard and freely available User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) that was developed to measure the UX of interactive products and services. The preliminary research showed that the MS Teams obtained the highest score among all the measured UX scales. Google Meet had slightly lower values, while Moodle had the lowest average values. The data also show that in terms of pragmatic quality, MS Teams was rated the best followed by Moodle and Google Meet. The students find Google Meet the weakest in terms of the quality of its task-related aspects. The hedonic quality data shows MS Teams first, followed by Google Meet and Moodle. The results of the research have been analysed and discussed, and future research suggestions have been defined.","PeriodicalId":217320,"journal":{"name":"6th FEB International Scientific Conference 2022","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"6th FEB International Scientific Conference 2022","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18690/um.epf.5.2022.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Lately, user experience (UX) has become an important and frequently used approach to determine the perception of digital products and services. UX measures what users feel and sense directly while getting to know and using these products and services regularly. In this study, which was conducted in Slovenia and in Bulgaria, we have researched the UX of students related to the Microsoft Teams (MS Teams), Google Meet and Moodle e-learning platforms. We used a standard and freely available User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) that was developed to measure the UX of interactive products and services. The preliminary research showed that the MS Teams obtained the highest score among all the measured UX scales. Google Meet had slightly lower values, while Moodle had the lowest average values. The data also show that in terms of pragmatic quality, MS Teams was rated the best followed by Moodle and Google Meet. The students find Google Meet the weakest in terms of the quality of its task-related aspects. The hedonic quality data shows MS Teams first, followed by Google Meet and Moodle. The results of the research have been analysed and discussed, and future research suggestions have been defined.
Microsoft Teams、Google Meet和Moodle在线学习平台的用户体验对比分析
最近,用户体验(UX)已成为确定数字产品和服务感知的重要且经常使用的方法。用户体验衡量的是用户在了解和定期使用这些产品和服务时直接感受到的东西。在斯洛文尼亚和保加利亚进行的这项研究中,我们研究了与Microsoft Teams (MS Teams)、Google Meet和Moodle电子学习平台相关的学生用户体验。我们使用了一个标准的、免费的用户体验问卷(UEQ),它是用来衡量交互式产品和服务的用户体验的。初步研究表明,MS团队在所有测量的用户体验量表中获得了最高分。Google Meet的平均值略低,而Moodle的平均值最低。数据还显示,在实用质量方面,MS Teams被评为最佳,其次是Moodle和Google Meet。学生们发现Google Meet在任务相关方面的质量是最差的。享乐质量数据显示,MS Teams排名第一,其次是Google Meet和Moodle。对研究结果进行了分析和讨论,并提出了今后的研究建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信