DOCSLIB.ORG

Shaking the Usability Tree

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shaking the Usability Tree BEHAVIOUR & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1541255 Shaking the usability tree: why usability is not a dead end, and a constructive way forward Simone Borsci a,b, Stefano Federici c, Alessio Malizia d,e and Maria Laura De Filippisf aDepartment of Cognitive Psychology and Ergonomics, Faculty of Behavioral Management and Social sciences, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands; bNational Institute for Health Research, London IVD Co-operative, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK; cDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; dSchools of Creative Arts, University of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire, UK; eFaculty of Logistics, Molde University College, Molde, Norway; fCognitiveLab Research Group, Perugia, Italy ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY A recent contribution to the ongoing debate concerning the concept of usability and its measures Received 6 June 2018 proposed that usability reached a dead end – i.e. a construct unable to provide stable results and to Accepted 22 October 2018 unify scientific knowledge. Extensive commentaries rejected the conclusion that researchers need KEYWORDS to look for alternative constructs to measure the quality of interaction. Nevertheless, several Human–machine interface; practitioners involved in this international debate asked for a constructive way to move forward fi fi interaction design; ISO 9241- the usability practice. In fact, two key issues of the usability eld were identi ed in this debate: 11; usability; usability factors; (i) knowledge fragmentation in the scientific community, and (ii) the unstable relationship usability testing among the usability metrics. We recognise both the importance and impact of these key issues, although, in line with others, we may not agree with the conclusion that the usability is a dead end. Under the light of the international debate, this work discusses the strengths and weaknesses of usability construct and its application. Our discussion focuses on identifying alternative explanations to the issues and to suggest mitigation strategies, which may be considered the starting point to move forward the usability field. However, scientific community actions will be needed to implement these mitigation strategies and to harmonise the usability practice. 1. Introduction usability was recently proposed by Tractinsky (2018). This author suggested that the framework of the ISO The formal umbrella construct of usability was defined 9241-11 is collapsing and that the usability is a dead in 1998 by the International Standard for Organisation, end. Tractinsky identified two main theoretical reasons as follows: ‘The extent to which a product can be used to claim that the construct is falling apart, that we may by specified users to achieve specified goals with effec- summarise as follows: tiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified con- text of use’ (ISO 9241-11, 1998). This definition aims to bridge and connect different definitions and stan- (i) The broad characterisation of the usability con- dards of interaction design. Moreover, this umbrella struct. Usability is not well characterised by the provides a common framework of usability engineering ISO 9241-11 definition, namely the umbrella con- (Bevan 1995; Bevan et al. 2016; ISO 9241-11, 1998). struct. In fact, umbrella constructs are usually too Before and after the formalisation of the ISO 9241-11 broad and weak to adequately serve the scope of a (1998), experts have attempted to critically discuss scientific community. The uncertainty around the and extend the theoretical framework of usability (e.g. construct of usability is a barrier to accumulate Quesenbery 2003). and to properly organise the disciplinary knowledge. The history of interaction design and evaluation is For this reason, the scientific usability community is populated by alternative, and sometimes conflicting, fragmented and experts are still debating the con- constructs and definitions of usability. A detailed revi- struct of usability and its assessment measures – sion of the issues associated to the conceptualisation of i.e. issues of the fragmentation of knowledge. CONTACT Simone Borsci [email protected] Department of Cognitive Psychology and Ergonomics, University of Twente, 5 Drienerlolaan, 7522 NB Enschede, Netherlands © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/ 4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. 2 S. BORSCI ET AL. (ii) The unclear representation and operationalisa- We acknowledge that both the issues (the fragmen- tion of the usability construct. Experts tend to tation of knowledge and the unstable relationship operationalise their evaluation (protocols) in differ- among the usability metrics) are key challenges for ent ways by using a wide range of methods to assess the field usability. Tractinsky’s perspective (2018)is different variables. This is a limitation to perform that these issues originate from the uncertainty associ- appropriate replication of findings and comparative ated to the weak umbrella construct of the ISO 9241- analyses of usability evaluation studies (Hornbæk 11. Tractinsky suggests that experts have to look for et al. 2014). Evidence gathered in comparative an alternative (and hopefully more) robust set of evalu- studies (Frøkjær, Hertzum, and Hornbæk 2000; ation metrics yet to be identified. Therefore, this author Hornbæk 2006; Hornbæk and Law 2007; Sauro proposes to abandon or to significantly revise the cur- and Lewis 2009; Hornbæk et al. 2014) do not com- rent construct. pletely support the theoretical construct of usability. The present work will take a different approach from In fact, studies reported an unstable and weak the commentaries cited above; in fact, we will not reject relationship among the dimensions of efficiency, or agree with the reasoning and the conclusion of Trac- effectiveness, and satisfaction – i.e. the issue of the tinsky, but we will attempt to define a constructive way relationship among the usability metrics. forward. To achieve this aim the present work critically dis- Several authors (Bardzell 2018; Bertelsen 2018; Hertzum cusses the two issues identified by Tractinsky and seeks 2018; Hornbæk 2018; Reeves 2018; Roto 2018; Stage for evidence to support alternative perspectives on the 2018) commented on Tractinsky’s proposal by mostly causes of knowledge fragmentation and the unstable rejecting the conclusion that usability is a dead end, relationship between the dimensions of the construct. but also recognising the need of a way to progress in a Mitigation strategies against the issues identified above constructive way the usability field. will be proposed to harmonise the fragmented field of Figure 1. Structure of the work and key contents of the four main sections. BEHAVIOUR & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 3 usability and to enable appropriate ways to replicate and efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction with a span on compare usability studies. average from 0.25 to 0.6 e.g. in one study the level of corre- Figure 1 provides a graphic insight of the contents of lation among the metrics to measure efficiency, eff ective- the four main sections of this work. ness, and satisfaction may result lower (or higher) than the correlation reported in other studies (Frøkjær, Hert- zum, and Hornbæk 2000;Hornbæk2006; Hornbæk and 2. Theoretical issues Law 2007;SauroandLewis2009; Hornbæk et al. 2014). 2.1. The broad characterisation of the usability The variability of the relationship among the usability construct: knowledge fragmentation dimensions is presented by Tractinsky (2018) as the ulti- mate evidence of failure of the usability construct. How- fi Umbrella de nitions and terms are typical of multidisci- ever, authors of these comparative studies have fi fi plinary elds. These de nitions usually aim to describe underlined that the variability in the relationship among complex phenomena to bring together the perspective the usability dimensions is due to multiple factors, such ff of experts from di erent backgrounds. Umbrella con- as: which methods are used and how, and also how data structs are developed by communities to provide experts are reported by professionals to ensure that results can be with a common set of objectives within a shared theoreti- replicated and compared (Frøkjær, Hertzum, and Horn- fi cal framework. Examples of umbrella de nitions, terms, bæk 2000; Hornbæk 2006; Hornbæk and Law 2007; ff and frameworks are quite common in literature of di er- Sauro and Lewis 2009). In tune with Hornbaek and col- ent domains e.g. pervasive developmental disorders leagues (2014), ‘Replicability’ is defined as the possibility (Caronna, Milunsky, and Tager-Flusberg 2008); disabil- to confirm, expand, or generalise previous findings. ity (WHO 2001); advanced nursing practice (Lowe et al. Tractinsky’s(2018) assumption is that experts tend to 2012); psychology of attitude (Eagly and Chaiken 2007); operationalise the usability assessment in different ways Public Service Motivation (Vandenabeele, Scheepers, because there is no clear relationship between the con- and Hondeghem 2006), etc. struct and its measures. We agree that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems (ISO 9241-210:2010)
    Irish Standard I.S. EN ISO 9241-210:2010 Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (ISO 9241-210:2010) © NSAI 2010 No copying without NSAI permission except as permitted by copyright law. This is a free 13 page sample. Access the full version online. I.S. EN ISO 9241-210:2010 The National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) produces the following categories of formal documents: I.S. xxx: Irish Standard – national specification based on the consensus of an expert panel and subject to public consultation. S.R. xxx: Standard Recommendation - recommendation based on the consensus of an expert panel and subject to public consultation. SWiFT xxx: A rapidly developed recommendatory document based on the consensus of the participants of an NSAI workshop. EN ISO 13407:1999 EN ISO 9241-210:2010 20 October, 2010 EN ISO 13407:1999 1 June, 1999 ICS number: This document was published 13.180 under the authority of the NSAI 35.180 This is a free 13 page sample. Access the full version online. and comes into effect on: 8 November, 2010 1 Swift Square, T +353 1 807 3800 T +353 1 857 6730 Northwood, Santry F +353 1 807 3838 F +353 1 857 6729 Dublin 9 E [email protected] W standards.ie W Údarás um Chaighdeáin Náisiúnta na hÉireann I.S. EN ISO 9241-210:2010 EUROPEAN STANDARD EN ISO 9241-210 NORME EUROPÉENNE EUROPÄISCHE NORM October 2010 ICS 13.180; 35.180 Supersedes EN ISO 13407:1999 English Version Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human- centred design for interactive systems (ISO 9241-210:2010) Ergonomie de l'interaction homme-système - Partie 210: Ergonomie der Mensch-System-Interaktion - Teil 210: Conception centrée sur l'opérateur humain pour les Prozess zur Gestaltung gebrauchstauglicher interaktiver systèmes interactifs (ISO 9241-210:2010) Systeme (ISO 9241-210:2010) This European Standard was approved by CEN on 30 September 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • The Usability of a Visual, Flow-Based Programming Environment for Non-Programmers
    THE USABILITY OF A VISUAL, FLOW-BASED PROGRAMMING ENVIRONMENT FOR NON-PROGRAMMERS by Alia H. Shubair A thesis presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Program of Computer Science Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2014 © Alia H. Shubair 2014 ii Author’s Declaration I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I authorize Ryerson University to lend this thesis to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this thesis by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public for the purpose of scholarly research only. iii iv Abstract The Usability of A Visual, Flow-Based Programming Environment for Non-Programmers Alia H. Shubair Master of Science, Computer Science Ryerson University, 2014 Living with “Big Data” gives us the advantage of being able to exploit this wealth of data sources and derive useful insights to make better decisions, enhance productivity, and optimize resources. However, this advantage is limited to a small group of profes- sionals, with the rest of the population unable to access this data. Lack of support for non-professionals creates the need for data manipulation tools to support all sectors of society without acquiring complex technical skills.
    [Show full text]
  • Iso 9241-210:2010(E)
    This preview is downloaded from www.sis.se. Buy the entire standard via https://www.sis.se/std-912053 INTERNATIONAL ISO STANDARD 9241-210 First edition 2010-03-15 Ergonomics of human–system interaction — Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems Ergonomie de l'interaction homme–système — Partie 210: Conception centrée sur l'opérateur humain pour les systèmes interactifs Reference number ISO 9241-210:2010(E) © ISO 2010 This preview is downloaded from www.sis.se. Buy the entire standard via https://www.sis.se/std-912053 ISO 9241-210:2010(E) PDF disclaimer This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with Adobe's licensing policy, this file may be printed or viewed but shall not be edited unless the typefaces which are embedded are licensed to and installed on the computer performing the editing. In downloading this file, parties accept therein the responsibility of not infringing Adobe's licensing policy. The ISO Central Secretariat accepts no liability in this area. Adobe is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated. Details of the software products used to create this PDF file can be found in the General Info relative to the file; the PDF-creation parameters were optimized for printing. Every care has been taken to ensure that the file is suitable for use by ISO member bodies. In the unlikely event that a problem relating to it is found, please inform the Central Secretariat at the address given below. COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT © ISO 2010 All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from either ISO at the address below or ISO's member body in the country of the requester.
    [Show full text]
  • NORSOK STANDARD R-002 Edition 2, September 2012
    NORSOK STANDARD R-002 Edition 2, September 2012 Lifting equipment This NORSOK standard is developed with broad petroleum industry participation by interested parties in the Norwegian petroleum industry and is owned by the Norwegian petroleum industry represented by The Norwegian Oil Industry Association (OLF) and The Federation of Norwegian Industry. Please note that whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this NORSOK standard, neither OLF nor The Federation of Norwegian Industry or any of their members will assume liability for any use thereof. Standards Norway is responsible for the administration and publication of this NORSOK standard. Standards Norway Telephone: + 47 67 83 86 00 Strandveien 18, P.O. Box 242 Fax: + 47 67 83 86 01 N-1326 Lysaker Email: [email protected] NORWAY Website: www.standard.no/petroleum Copyrights reserved Foreword 3 Introduction 3 1 Scope 4 2 Normative and informative references 4 2.1 Normative references 4 2.2 Informative references 8 3 Terms, definitions and abbreviations 8 3.1 Terms and definitions 8 3.2 Abbreviations 13 4 General safety requirements 13 4.1 Safety 13 4.2 Fitness for use 13 4.3 Reliability and availability 14 4.4 Principle of safety integration 14 4.5 Inherently safe design measures 14 4.6 Safeguarding and complementary protective measures 14 4.7 Information for use 14 4.8 Strength proportion 14 4.9 Maintenance 15 4.10 Quality management system 15 4.11 Risk assessment 15 4.12 Risk reduction 17 4.13 Documentation of risk assessment 17 4.14 Verification 18 4.15 Qualification
    [Show full text]
  • ISO 9241: Uma Proposta De Utilização Da Norma Para Avaliação Do Grau De Satisfação De Usuários De Software
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositório Institucional da UFSC Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção ISO 9241: Uma Proposta de Utilização da Norma para Avaliação do Grau de Satisfação de Usuários de Software Dissertação submetida à Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina como requisito parcial para obtenção do grau de Mestre em Engenharia de Produção por Marco Aurélio Medeiros Florianópolis, 30 de julho de 1999 ISO 9241: Uma Proposta de Utilização da Norma para Avaliação do Grau de Satisfação de Usuários de Software Marco Aurélio Medeiros Esta dissertação foi julgada adequada para a obtenção do título de Mestre em Engenharia, especialidade Engenharia de Produção, área de concentração Ergonomia , e aprovada em sua forma final pelo curso de Pós-Graduação da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Prof. Walter de Abreu Cybis, Dr. Orientador Prof. Ricardo Miranda Barcia, Dr. Ph.D. Coordenador do Curso de Pós-Graduação Banca Examinadora Prof. Neri dos Santos, Dr. Prof. Vitorio Bruno Mazzola, Dr. Prof. Walter de Abreu Cybis, Dr. ii Dedico este trabalho à minha esposa Márcia e a meus filhos, Artur e Luiza, motivos da minha existência e da minha felicidade. iii AGRADECIMENTOS Minha sincera gratidão: à minha família e à de minha esposa, pelo exemplo e apoio; à Diretoria da Softplan, Ílson, Guto e Marafon, e colaboradores, especialmente Fábio Miranda, estagiário no DERPR; Aos Departamentos de Estradas de Rodagem da Bahia, Distrito Federal, Paraná e Santa Catarina; ao Prof. Dr. Jochen Prümper, BAO – Alemanha, pela colaboração fundamental para a realização deste trabalho; ao meu Orientador, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Usability of Geographic Information; Current Challenges and Future Directions Brown M.1,2, Sharples S.2, Harding J.3, Parker C
    Usability of Geographic Information Page 1 Usability of Geographic Information; Current Challenges and Future Directions Brown M.1,2, Sharples S.2, Harding J.3, Parker C. J.4, Bearman N.5, Maguire M.4, Forrest D.6, Haklay M.7 and Jackson M.8. 1 Horizon Digital Economy Research, University of Nottingham, Innovation Park, Nottingham, NG7 2TU, UK 2Human Factors Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, University Park Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK 3Ordnance Survey, Adanac Drive, Southampton, SO16 0AS, UK 4 Loughborough Design School, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK 5 School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK 6 School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK 7Department of Civil, Environment and Geomatic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK 8Centre for Geospatial Sciences, Faculty of Engineering, University Park Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK ABSTRACT: The use of Geographic Information or GI, has grown rapidly in recent years. Previous research has identified the importance of usability and user centred design in enabling the proliferation and exploitation of GI. However, the design and development of usable GI is not simply a matter of applying the tried and tested usability methods that have been developed for software and web design. Dealing with data and specifically GI brings with it a number of issues that change the way usability and user centred design can be applied. This paper describes the outcomes of a workshop held in March 2010 exploring the core issues relating to GI usability.
    [Show full text]
  • Standards News Late August 2014 Volume 18, Number 16 Table of Contents Uno, Dos, Tres Documentos Para Revisión Pública
    PLASA Standards News Late August 2014 Volume 18, Number 16 Table of Contents Uno, dos, tres documentos para revisión pública.............................................................................................1 Please Donate to the TSP................................................................................................................................ 2 Fifteen Minutes and 36 Seconds of Fame........................................................................................................2 What's an American National Standard anyway?.............................................................................................2 WTO Technical Barrier to Trade Notifications...................................................................................................2 Chile Notification CHL/278............................................................................................................................ 2 Ecuador Notification ECU/71/ECU (ECU/71 , Add.1 , Add.2 , Add.3 , ).........................................................3 Ecuador Notification ECU/226/ECU (ECU/226 )...........................................................................................3 Taiwan Economy Notification TPKM/170.......................................................................................................3 ANSI Public Review Announcements...............................................................................................................4 Due 22 September 2014..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Foreword Introduction 1 Scope
    9/10/2016 ISO 6385:2016(en), Ergonomics principles in the design of work systems Foreword ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and non­governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization. The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular the different approval criteria needed for the different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives). Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www.iso.org/patents). Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not constitute an endorsement. For an explanation on the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the WTO principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) see the following URL: Foreword ­ Supplementary information.
    [Show full text]
  • Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems (ISO 9241-210:2019)
    Irish Standard I.S. EN ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (ISO 9241-210:2019) © CEN 2019 No copying without NSAI permission except as permitted by copyright law. This is a free 15 page sample. Access the full version online. I.S. EN ISO 9241-210:2019 Incorporating amendments/corrigenda/National Annexes issued since publication: The National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) produces the following categories of formal documents: I.S. xxx: Irish Standard — national specification based on the consensus of an expert panel and subject to public consultation. S.R. xxx: Standard Recommendation — recommendation based on the consensus of an expert panel and subject to public consultation. SWiFT xxx: A rapidly developed recommendatory document based on the consensus of the participants of an NSAI workshop. This document replaces/revises/consolidates the NSAI adoption of the document(s) indicated on the CEN/CENELEC cover/Foreword and the following National document(s): NOTE: The date of any NSAI previous adoption may not match the date of its original CEN/CENELEC document. This document is based on: Published: EN ISO 9241-210:2019 2019-08-21 This document was published ICS number: under the authority of the NSAI and comes into effect on: 13.180 35.180 2019-09-08 NOTE: If blank see CEN/CENELEC cover page This is a free 15 page sample. Access the full version online. NSAI T +353 1 807 3800 Sales: 1 Swift Square, F +353 1 807 3838 T +353 1 857 6730 Northwood, Santry E [email protected] F +353 1 857 6729 Dublin 9 W NSAI.ie W standards.ie Údarás um Chaighdeáin Náisiúnta na hÉireann National Foreword I.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practice Human Factors Guidance for Control Room/HMI Design
    Highways Consultancy Group - Highways Research Group Best Practice Human Factors Guidance for Control Room/HMI Design Contract Reference: 2/1308 Task Reference: 166(1308)MOTT Project Sponsor: Stuart White Date: November 2010 Executive Summary Control room, plant and equipment design can have a huge impact on human performance. Designing tasks, equipment and work stations to suit the user can reduce human error, accidents and ill-health. Failure to observe human factors principles can have serious consequences for individuals and for the whole organisation. Effective consideration of human factors will make work safer, healthier and more productive. The fundamental and consistent philosophy of human factors is to ensure that the human element, or user, is of principle concern within the design process. This approach promotes the inclusion of user (and operator) needs, capabilities, limitations and goals into the design process. This document contains guidance to summarise the best practice human factors approach to system/product design and development, within the general project lifecycle, in order to provide support to Highways Agency in creating more cost effective and usable designs. This guidance should prove useful to both Highways Agency project sponsors/managers and human factors specialists involved in Highways Agency system/product design and development projects. This document also contains a simple flowchart and checklist to allow the reader to determine whether the guidance is relevant to their project, and if so, which parts of the guidance should be focused on. The guidance presented in this document provides some simple steps that you can include within the project plan and supports the reader in this through raising a number of questions for consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Cost Assessment of User Experience Through EEG Signals
    Received July 24, 2020, accepted August 8, 2020, date of publication August 18, 2020, date of current version September 11, 2020. Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3017685 Low-Cost Assessment of User eXperience Through EEG Signals SANDRA CANO 1, (Member, IEEE), NELSON ARAUJO2, CRISTIAN GUZMAN2, CRISTIAN RUSU 1, AND SERGIO ALBIOL-PÉREZ 3 1Escuela de Ingenieria Informática, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2340000, Chile 2Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de San Buenaventura de Cali, Cali 760032, Colombia 3Aragón Health Research Institute (IIS Aragón), Universidad de Zaragoza (Teruel), 44003 Teruel, Spain Corresponding author: Sandra Cano ([email protected]) This work was supported in part by the Gobierno de Aragón, Departamento de Industria e Innovación, and in part by the Fondo Social Europeo Construyendo Europa desde Aragón and by grants from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Government and European Regional Development Fund, A way to build Europe under Grant FIS. PI17/00465. ABSTRACT EEG signals are an important tool for monitoring the brain activity of a person, but equipment, expertise and infrastructure are required. EEG technologies are generally expensive, thus few people are normally able to use them. However, some low-cost technologies are now available. One of these is OPENBCI, but it seems that it is yet to be widely employed in Human-Computer Interaction. In this study, we used OPENBCI technology to capture EEG signals linked to brain activity in ten subjects as they interacted with two video games: Candy Crush and Geometry Dash. The experiment aimed to capture the signals while the players interacted with the video games in several situations.
    [Show full text]
  • DELIVERABLE REPORT D10.3 (Revised) “Standardization”
    DELIVERABLE REPORT D10.3 (revised) “Standardization” collaborative project MASELTOV Mobile Assistance for Social Inclusion and Empowerment of Immigrants with Persuasive Learning Technologies and Social Network Services Grant Agreement No. 288587 / ICT for Inclusion project co-funded by the European Commission Information Society and Media Directorate-General Information and Communication Technologies Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013) Due date of deliverable: March 31, 2015 (month 39) Actual submission date: October 7, 2015 Start date of project: January 1, 2012 Duration: 36 months Work package WP10 – Dissemination & Exploitation Task T10.3 – Standardization Lead contractor for this deliverable JR Editor Lucas Paletta (JR) Authors Lucas Paletta (JR), Andrew Brasher (OU), Jan Bobeth (ATE), Jörg Nachbaur (Austrian Standards Institute), Michael Schwarz (JR) Quality reviewer OU Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007–2013) Dissemination Level PU Public X PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) MASELTOV – DELIVERABLE D10.3 (revised) “Standardization” Page 1 of 30 Mobile Assistance for Social Inclusion and Empowerment of Immigrants with Persuasive Learning Technologies and Social Network Services © MASELTOV - for details see MASELTOV Consortium Agreement. country MASELTOV partner organisation name code JOANNEUM RESEARCH FORSCHUNGSGESELLSCHAFT 01 JR AT MBH CURE CENTRUM FUR DIE UNTERSUCHUNG UND 02 CUR REALISIERUNG ENDBENUTZER-ORIENTIERTER AT INTERAKTIVER SYSTEME RESEARCH AND EDUCATION LABORATORY IN 03 AIT EL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES FUNDACIO PER A LA UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE 04 UOC ES CATALUNYA 05 OU THE OPEN UNIVERSITY UK 06 COV COVENTRY UNIVERSITY UK 07 CTU CESKE VYSOKE UCENI TECHNICKE V PRAZE CZ 08 FHJ FH JOANNEUM GESELLSCHAFT M.B.H.
    [Show full text]