Affinity for technology interaction and fields of study: implications for human-centered design of applications for public administration

Daniel Wessel, Moreen Heine, Christiane Attig, T. Franke
{"title":"Affinity for technology interaction and fields of study: implications for human-centered design of applications for public administration","authors":"Daniel Wessel, Moreen Heine, Christiane Attig, T. Franke","doi":"10.1145/3404983.3410020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Affinity for Technology Interaction (ATI) describes whether a person approaches or avoids interaction with technology [1], making it an important variable in human-centered design. To determine whether ATI will likely remain an important variable in the future, we compared the ATI scores of those who will develop applications (students of media and computer science) with those who will use them in a specific context (students of public administration). We also looked for possible selection biases when conducting online samples regarding technology, by comparing a self-selected online sample of public administration employees with a sample of students of public administration conducted in a classroom, in which no selection biases should have had occurred. To locate the samples in the general population we also compared them with a quota sample of the German population. Results indicate markedly different approaches to technology interaction between the student samples and the online sample being more similar to the media and computer science students. We discuss consequences for the human-centered design process, especially for understanding the users.","PeriodicalId":298769,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2020","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2020","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3404983.3410020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Affinity for Technology Interaction (ATI) describes whether a person approaches or avoids interaction with technology [1], making it an important variable in human-centered design. To determine whether ATI will likely remain an important variable in the future, we compared the ATI scores of those who will develop applications (students of media and computer science) with those who will use them in a specific context (students of public administration). We also looked for possible selection biases when conducting online samples regarding technology, by comparing a self-selected online sample of public administration employees with a sample of students of public administration conducted in a classroom, in which no selection biases should have had occurred. To locate the samples in the general population we also compared them with a quota sample of the German population. Results indicate markedly different approaches to technology interaction between the student samples and the online sample being more similar to the media and computer science students. We discuss consequences for the human-centered design process, especially for understanding the users.
技术互动与研究领域的亲缘关系:公共行政应用程序以人为本设计的含意
技术交互亲和力(Affinity for Technology Interaction, ATI)描述了一个人是接近还是避免与技术交互[1],使其成为以人为本设计的一个重要变量。为了确定ATI在未来是否仍然是一个重要的变量,我们比较了那些将开发应用程序的学生(媒体和计算机科学专业的学生)和那些将在特定环境中使用它们的学生(公共管理专业的学生)的ATI分数。我们还在进行有关技术的在线样本时寻找可能的选择偏差,通过将公共行政雇员的自我选择在线样本与在课堂上进行的公共行政学生样本进行比较,其中不应该发生选择偏差。为了在一般人群中找到样本,我们还将它们与德国人口的配额样本进行了比较。结果表明,学生样本之间的技术交互方式明显不同,在线样本更类似于媒体和计算机科学专业的学生。我们讨论了以人为中心的设计过程的结果,特别是对于理解用户。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信