Improving the Identification of Hedonic Quality in User Requirements — A Controlled Experiment

Andreas Maier, D. Berry
{"title":"Improving the Identification of Hedonic Quality in User Requirements — A Controlled Experiment","authors":"Andreas Maier, D. Berry","doi":"10.1109/RE.2017.49","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context and Motivation Systematically engineering a good user experience (UX) into a computer-based system under development demands that the user requirements of the system reflect all needs, including emotional, of all stakeholders. User requirements address two different types of qualities: pragmatic qualities (PQs), that address system functionality and usability, and hedonic qualities (HQs) that address the stakeholder's psychological well-being. Studies show that users tend to describe such satisfying UXes mainly with PQs, and that some users seem to believe that they are describing a HQ when they are actually describing a PQ. Question/Problem The problem is to see if classification of any user requirement as PQ-related or HQ-related is difficult, and if so, why. Principal Ideas/Results We conducted a controlled experiment in which twelve requirements-engineering and UX professionals, hereinafter called \"classifiers\" classified each of 105 user requirements as PQ-related or HQ-related. The experiment shows that neither (1) a classifier's involvement in the project from which the requirements came nor (2) the classifier's use of a detailed model of the qualities in addition to the standard definitions of \"PQ\" and \"HQ\" has a positive effect on the consistency of the classifier's classification with that of others. Contribution The experiment revealed that classification of user requirements is a lot harder than initially assumed.","PeriodicalId":176958,"journal":{"name":"2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2017.49","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Context and Motivation Systematically engineering a good user experience (UX) into a computer-based system under development demands that the user requirements of the system reflect all needs, including emotional, of all stakeholders. User requirements address two different types of qualities: pragmatic qualities (PQs), that address system functionality and usability, and hedonic qualities (HQs) that address the stakeholder's psychological well-being. Studies show that users tend to describe such satisfying UXes mainly with PQs, and that some users seem to believe that they are describing a HQ when they are actually describing a PQ. Question/Problem The problem is to see if classification of any user requirement as PQ-related or HQ-related is difficult, and if so, why. Principal Ideas/Results We conducted a controlled experiment in which twelve requirements-engineering and UX professionals, hereinafter called "classifiers" classified each of 105 user requirements as PQ-related or HQ-related. The experiment shows that neither (1) a classifier's involvement in the project from which the requirements came nor (2) the classifier's use of a detailed model of the qualities in addition to the standard definitions of "PQ" and "HQ" has a positive effect on the consistency of the classifier's classification with that of others. Contribution The experiment revealed that classification of user requirements is a lot harder than initially assumed.
改进用户需求中的对价质量识别--对照实验
背景与动机 在开发中的计算机系统中系统地设计良好的用户体验(UX),要求系统的用户需求反映所有利益相关者的所有需求,包括情感需求。用户需求涉及两种不同类型的品质:实用品质(PQs)涉及系统功能和可用性,享乐品质(HQs)涉及利益相关者的心理健康。研究表明,用户往往主要用 PQ 来描述令人满意的用户体验,而且有些用户似乎认为他们描述的是 HQ,而实际上他们描述的是 PQ。问题 问题在于,将任何用户需求分类为 PQ 相关或 HQ 相关是否困难,如果困难,原因何在。主要观点/结果 我们进行了一个对照实验,让 12 位需求工程和用户体验专业人士(以下称 "分类员")将 105 个用户需求分类为 PQ 相关或 HQ 相关。实验结果表明:(1) 分类者是否参与了需求产生的项目;(2) 除了 "PQ "和 "HQ "的标准定义外,分类者是否使用了详细的质量模型,都不会对分类者的分类与他人的分类是否一致产生积极影响。贡献 实验表明,用户需求分类比最初设想的要难得多。
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