Evaluation in the FEEL Project - A Pilot Study Peter Lönnqvist and Hillevi Sundholm The Future Ubiquitous Service Environments Research Group, Stockholm.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Silicon Valley Math Initiative Professional Development Series
Advertisements

SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Dr. (Soc.Sc.) Kalle Toiskallio The Model of Mobile Context of Use.
Using Video Segments to Enhance Early Clinical Experiences of Prospective Teachers Kristen Cuthrell, Michael Vitale, College of Education, East Carolina.
Rapid Prototyping Dimensions and terminology Non-computer methods
Systems Analysis, Prototyping and Iteration Systems Analysis.
Rachida Primov Department of Modern Languages and Literatures University of Miami
Game Design Serious Games Miikka Junnila.
Characteristics of on-line formation courses. Criteria for their pedagogical evaluation Catalina Martínez Mediano, Department of Research Methods and Diagnosis.
From requirements to design
The Architecture Design Process
Feedback from Usability Evaluation to User Interface Design: Are Usability Reports Any Good? Christian M. Nielsen 1 Michael Overgaard 2 Michael B. Pedersen.
© Lethbridge/Laganière 2001 Chapter 7: Focusing on Users and Their Tasks1 7.1 User Centred Design (UCD) Software development should focus on the needs.
SIMS 213: User Interface Design & Development Marti Hearst Thurs, Jan 20, 2005.
SIMS 213: User Interface Design & Development Marti Hearst Thurs, Jan 22, 2004.
User-centered approaches to interaction design. Overview Why involve users at all? What is a user-centered approach? Understanding users’ work —Coherence.
SIMS 213: User Interface Design & Development Marti Hearst Thurs, Jan 18, 2007.
Damian Gordon.  Summary and Relevance of topic paper  Definition of Usability Testing ◦ Formal vs. Informal methods of testing  Testing Basics ◦ Five.
Why planning? In order to make a successful project good communication is key! The process of planning and designing a project involves many people from.
Week 2 - Lecture Interactive Digital Moving Image Production | CU3003NI | - Pratik Man Singh Pradhan.
Is the Flipped Classroom Appropriate at the University Level? Thomas J Francl, MBA, CMA National University April 10, 2014.
CCT 333: Imagining the Audience in a Wired World Class 8: Understanding Interaction in Complex Environments.
Dr. Ken Hoganson, © August 2014 Programming in R STAT8030 Programming in R COURSE NOTES 1: Hoganson Programming Languages.
Thinking Actively in a Social Context T A S C.
1 telePresence Tracking Project Results Psychological Processing of Media Spring 2012.
Top 10 Instructional Strategies
The Computer for the 21 st Century Mark Weiser – XEROX PARC Presented By: Mihail Ionescu.
Principles of User Centred Design Howell Istance.
Building Community within the Mathematics Classroom Unit of Study 0 Global Concept Guide: 1 of 1.
Critical Events Legacy Learning Program Schema. Learning Program Learning Modules Classroom Management Special Needs Education Child Development Literature.
The context of the interface Ian Ruthven University of Strathclyde.
CONTENTS Arrival Characters Definition Merits Chararterstics Workflows Wfms Workflow engine Workflows levels & categories.
Visualizing Information in Global Networks in Real Time Design, Implementation, Usability Study.
Object-Oriented Software Engineering Practical Software Development using UML and Java Chapter 7: Focusing on Users and Their Tasks.
What is Usability? Usability Is a measure of how easy it is to use something: –How easy will the use of the software be for a typical user to understand,
The Creative Problem Solving Pack. The following pages provide separate packs that you can use in the following situations. * Creative problem solving.
SE: CHAPTER 7 Writing The Program
INF5200/TOOL5100: CSCW/L Issues in CSCW and groupware Lecture 1, Issues in CSCW and Groupware: Anders Mørch and Sisse Finken INF5200/TOOL 5100,
Chapter 10 Analysis and Design Discipline. 2 Purpose The purpose is to translate the requirements into a specification that describes how to implement.
GettingUsers Started Getting Users Started Instructor: Glenda H. Easter ITSW 1410, Presentation Media Software.
©2010 John Wiley and Sons Chapter 3 Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction Chapter 3- Experimental Design.
Usability Testing 2 Planning and Reporting From:. rnusa/testplan.html
User Interface Design & Usability for the Web Card Sorting You should now have a basic idea as to content requirements, functional requirements and user.
TOOL5100: CSCL Issues in CSCW and groupware A. Mørch, Issues in CSCW and Groupware: Anders Mørch TOOL 5100,
Usability 1 Usability evaluation Without users - analytical techniques With users - survey and observational techniques.
Usability Engineering Dr. Dania Bilal IS 582 Spring 2006.
Grade Book Database Presentation Jeanne Winstead CINS 137.
Usability Evaluation, part 2. REVIEW: A Test Plan Checklist, 1 Goal of the test? Specific questions you want to answer? Who will be the experimenter?
Prototyping life cycle Important steps 1. Does prototyping suit the system 2. Abbreviated representation of requirements 3. Abbreviated design specification.
Lecture 13.  Failure mode: when team understands requirements but is unable to meet them.  To ensure that you are building the right system Continually.
Unit – I Presentation. Unit – 1 (Introduction to Software Project management) Definition:-  Software project management is the art and science of planning.
1 Chapter 2 Organization Create Consistent Organizational Patterns.
Classroom Management: Physical Space Classroom set–up for efficient instruction, routines, and monitoring  Materials ready  Noise minimized  Efficient.
From Use Cases to Implementation 1. Structural and Behavioral Aspects of Collaborations  Two aspects of Collaborations Structural – specifies the static.
Instructional Strategies Cindy Cregar EDD/544. What should I consider when choosing an instructional strategy?
Lecture #1: Introduction to Algorithms and Problem Solving Dr. Hmood Al-Dossari King Saud University Department of Computer Science 6 February 2012.
CCT 333: Imagining the Audience in a Wired World Class 8: Complex Interaction/ Activity Theory.
Embedded Real-Time Systems Processing interrupts Lecturer Department University.
Investigate Plan Design Create Evaluate (Test it to objective evaluation at each stage of the design cycle) state – describe - explain the problem some.
Session Learning Goals Better understand your personality dimensions Better understand others Be able to apply MBTI results to your personal and professional.
From Use Cases to Implementation 1. Mapping Requirements Directly to Design and Code  For many, if not most, of our requirements it is relatively easy.
GroupMap Starter’s Guide Think Better Together Plan, brainstorm, discuss and prioritise for action. © GroupMap Pty Ltd |
Evaluation through user participation
Overview of the LHD Central Control Room Data Monitoring Environment
Week 10: Object Modeling (1)Use Case Model
Methodologies By Akinola Soyinka.
Collaboration with Google Drive
Building Community within the Mathematics Classroom
K–8 Session 1: Exploring the Critical Areas
Uniprocessor scheduling
From Use Cases to Implementation
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation in the FEEL Project - A Pilot Study Peter Lönnqvist and Hillevi Sundholm The Future Ubiquitous Service Environments Research Group, Stockholm University and KTH Center for Wireless Systems, Kista, Sweden

Presentation outline Overview of the study Experiment movies Conclusions/Future Work YOUR input!

Overview of the Study Procedure/Case Study –iLounge –Experiment goals/the FEEL project –Experiment procedure

iLounge The iLounge in Kista is funded by the Wallenberg foundation Ready during spring 2002 Ubiquitous Service Environment –Platform for Development –Study Environment –Showroom

Experiment goals/the FEEL project Non-intrusive services to support Focussed, Efficient and Enjoyable Local activities. The main objective of the project is to deal with the problem of the intrusiveness of today's mobile technology and how work in local environments can be enhanced by introducing the idea of non- intrusive services realized partly by disappearing computer environments. The work in the project will be based on the detailed analysis of a number of concrete scenarios where today technologies for mobile and distributed work obviously create intrusions on the local activities going on.

Experiment goals/the FEEL project cont´d Based on the analyses of the concrete scenarios we will: design appropriate disappearing computer environments design mechanisms by which multiple services simultaneously can share and effectively use the disappearing computer environment for the last purpose to build on the software agent paradigm for service design establish a software platform which handles software components on small artefacts transparently and manages open sets of services making usability studies for the disappearing computer environments

Experiment procedure Ravens Matrices

Experiment procedure cont´d Different modalities for (routed) information on different displays Banner iClock –Sound – No sound

Experiment movies Instructing the participants ** Participants working with the task ** Intrusions **

Method and Results Method –Qualitative, experimental, explorative PILOT study Results –Video material remaining to be analyzed… –Task and intrusion experiences evaluated

Task and intrusion experiences evaluated The main result shows that: The iBanner (personal) was the most preferable mode, although the participants noticed less notifications than the participants who received the notifications at the iClock or with the sBanner (public). The iClock was the least preferable mode. Interesting is that the subjects did not notice the iClock’s bell ring even though we thought it was a clear signal. The rate of noticed messages was highest among the participants who received the notification on the sBanner. The users did not think that the notifications interfered with their group work.

Some user comments on the work environment M 35: “More people get engaged! Good to have many displays to work on! It was some problems with the table, because it only could handle one at the time. You could concentrate at one part (your display), and at the same time work with the whole problem.” F 24: “Flexible with three displays so you could cooperate, but also to ‘mind you own business’. After a while we found a good routine to work at the table, but sometimes the routine was disturbed, because only one person could select [a picture] at a time.” F 25: “Very nice, it makes it possible to have a good dialogue, everyone are involved, and ‘make their part’, and doesn’t have to feel set aside. Definitely good for problem solving, and other collaborative work.” M 27: “I think this is great fun and exciting with this technology. The possibilities to move object between different areas increase the interaction degree, I think. The overview is very good with the two big displays.” M 29: “Interesting with direct manipulation of the objects with respect to the fingers. Frustrating that only one could touch the display at the same time. It was difficult to get a fast overview of the material on the three displays. It was difficult to compare the pictures between the table display and a wall display – it was easier to compare between the wall displays.” F 23: “It was funny and easy if you ignore that two people couldn’t work at the table at the same time. Easy to grasp.” F 40: “Good, especially for group work, in for example design phases, analysis and decision support. Three people I think is optimal, if you are getting more people it will get little space, especially due to that only one person at a time could influence the display. With optimal I mean that everyone is active.” F 44: “The room is soothing. It was quite easy to concentrate on the task. Good that you could move around the table, and also to have additional displays around [the table]. Good as a ‘focus room’.”

Future Work New Prototype During the autumn of 2002 a new scaled up prototype will be developed for the iLounge. For the chosen task, physical space and scenario, the mechanisms for non- intrusiveness will be extended, redesigned and reimplemented. In the new prototype the distributed events occuring will not only be shown as notifications but small scale interactive sessions of sms character. The prototype will be iteratively enhanced until end of February A more realistic User Study During March-May 2003, a larger scale user study will be performed based on student groups from a design oriented course at KTH. The students on this project based course will be using the iLounge for the series of sessions they need to finish their project work. In this study there will be real distributed events occuring during the group sessions. This study will run for a longer time period and we will be able to also study other aspects of the problem, compared to the first user study described above.

Visit the FEEL project exhibition Here!

Your input! Peter Lönnqvist Hillevi Sundholm