Empirical Studies of Aesthetics in Information Technology Noam Tractinsky Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Nov 2003

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.2 Contents 1. 1.Background 2. 2.Description of 4 empirical studies on aesthetics and IT 3. 3.Discussion

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.3 History: Emergence of the HCI Discipline Context: Emergence of interactive systems Roots: cognitive science, ergonomics Goal: efficient interactions Criteria: time, errors Flagship concept: UsabilityUsability Aesthetics considered irrelevant if not outright harmful

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.4 Future: The User Experience? Context: universal accessibility, Web-based applications, customization, personalization, IT as consumer commodityconsumer commodity Goal: support the user experience Affective Computing Aesthetic Computing “… the theory, practice and application of aesthetics in computing.” Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.5 Studies of Aesthetics of Information Technology

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.6 Study 1 – ATM Layout Design Trigger: Kurosu and Kashimura, 1995 K&K’s research goal was to find correlation between usability guidelines (“inherent usability”) and “apparent usability” K&K’s research Finding: high correlations between perceptions of (pre-use) usability and of aesthetics Interesting … but results are probably tainted by Japanese culture Tractinsky, CHI ‘97

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.7 Study 1 – Cross-Cultural Validation Repeat the study in Israel Improve the methodology – three experiments – –Exact replication – –Separate measurement of aesthetic and usability responses – –Computerized, complete randomization

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.8 Example 1

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.9 Example 2

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.10 Results: Japan vs. Israel Measures Correlations with Apparent Usability K&KExp. 1Exp. 2Exp. 3 Aesthetics Distance Keypad Type Grouping Sequence Hand-Domin Sequence Safety

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.11 Very interesting … Beautiful = Usable ?

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.12 Study 2 – ATM Usage What happens to the aesthetics-usability relation after usage? Evaluation of 9 layouts from the previous studies (randomly displayed) on three attributes: usability, aesthetics, amount of information Evaluation Manipulating aesthetics: Assign to experimental groups first; then assign systems based on pre-experimental ratings Manipulating Usability: Introduction of system delays and other faulty features Participants completed 11 ATM taskstasks Tractinsky, Shoval-Katz and Ikar, IwC, 2000

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.13 Experimental Design and Pre-Experiment Perceptions Aesthetic Level Pre-experimental Perceived Measure Usability HighLow High Aesthetics Usability Information N 8.48 (1.25) 7.62 (1.53) 4.91 (1.48) (0.94) 6.90 (1.55) 4.80 (1.99) 20 Medium Aesthetics Usability Information N 5.05 (1.05) 5.20 (2.17) 5.45 (1.95) (0.99) 3.84 (2.43) 5.63 (1.54) 19 Low Aesthetics Usability Information N 2.13 (1.10) 4.04 (2.23) 5.61 (1.53) (1.22) 3.19 (2.23) 6.57 (1.43) 21

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.14 Correlations Pre- Usability Pre- Information Post- Aesthetics Post- Usability Post- Information Post- Satisfaction Pre- Aesthetics.66*-.26*.62*.50* * Pre- Usability *.48* * Pre- Information *.00 Post- Aesthetics --.71* * Post- Usability * Post- Information * p <.01 level. Table 2: A correlation matrix of pre-, and post-experimental measures (n = 124). The colors separate pre-experimental correlations between three measures (top-left), post- experimental correlations (bottom-right), and correlations between pre-, and post- experimental measures (top-right).

Post-experimental perceptions of usability and aesthetics Fig. 1. Post-experimental perceptions of usability and aesthetics (on a 1-10 scale) under three levels of ATM aesthetics and two levels of ATM usability.

MANCOVA FactorDependent Variable (Post- Experimental Perceived Measures) Univariate F (df) Stepdown F (df) 1. Covariate (Pre- exp. Perceived Usability) Usability Aesthetics Satisfaction A. of Information 7.64* (1, 117) 7.76* (1, 117) 7.02* (1, 117) 0.16 (1, 117) 7.64* (1, 117) 2.04 (1, 116) 0.10 (1, 115) 0.37 (1, 114) 2. Aesthetics Usability Aesthetics Satisfaction A. of Information 4.75* (2, 117) 9.73** (2, 117) 4.88* (2, 117) 0.92 (2, 117) 4.75* (2, 117) 4.49* (2, 116) 0.06 (2, 115) 1.22 (2, 114) 3. Usability Usability Aesthetics Satisfaction A. of Information 1.38 (1, 117) 1.17 (1, 117) 2.92 (1, 117) 0.04 (1, 117) 1.38 (1, 117) 0.25 (1, 116) 1.47 (1, 115) 0.01 (1, 114) 4. Interaction (Aesthetics by Usability) Usability Aesthetics Satisfaction A. of Information 0.66 (2, 117) 0.73 (2, 117) 0.94 (2, 117) 0.01 (2, 117) 0.66 (2, 117) 0.31 (2, 116) 1.58 (2, 115) 0.06 (2, 114) * p <.01; ** p <.001. Table 3: Results and significance levels of univariate and stepdown F-tests of the effects of the Aesthetics and the Usability factors on post-experimental measures, with pre-experimental perceptions of usability as a covariate.

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.17 Study 3 - Developing a Measurement Instrument for the Evaluation of Web- site Aesthetics Study 3 - Developing a Measurement Instrument for the Evaluation of Web- site Aesthetics Lavie and Tractinsky, IJHCS, in press Questionnaire on aesthetics of Web sites Four experiments – –Three studies used students as participants – –In the last study users were solicited from web- sites Method – EFA, CFA

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.18 Experiments Experiment 1 – 125 students, Experiment 2 – 212 students, Experiment students, Experiment users, various sites

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.19 Classical Aesthetics (α=.86) Aesthetic design Pleasant design Clear design # Clean design Symmetric design Expressive Aesthetics (α=.86) Creative design Fascinating design Use of special effects Original design Sophisticated design Usability (α=.95) Convenient use Easy orientation Easy to use Easy to navigate Clear design # Aesthetic Dimensions of Web sites (Exp. 4, cross-validation) χ 2 (df=158)= p=.000 RMSEA =.058 TLI =.955 CFI =.962 IFI =.963 SRMR =.061

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.20 Study 4 - Skin Preferences Study 4 - Skin Preferences Tractinsky and Zmiri Motivation: The phenomenon of application personalization By 2000, more than 50,000,000 skins had been downloaded from the major skin sites Emotions towards computer applications are affected by three dimensions (after Rafaeli and Vilnai-Yavetz): Usability Aesthetics Symbolism

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.21 Application: Microsoft’s Media Player

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.22

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.23 Procedure Evaluate the default interface + 11 skins Evaluate the default interface + 11 skins Compare the default MP to two chosen skins; rate each on 15 items Compare the default MP to two chosen skins; rate each on 15 items Make a final choice; state the reasons Make a final choice; state the reasons

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.24 Ratings of the Default and the 2 choices

Items Factor 1 (Aesthetics) Factor 2 (Symbolism) Factor 3 (Usability) Artistic design Creative design Admirable design Beautiful design Positive message about user Communicates desirable image Represents likeable things Creates positive associations Fits personality Simple design Convenient to use Easy to learn Clear functionality Table 1: Rotated factor matrix of responses to items reflecting usability, aesthetics, and symbolism.

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.26 UsabilityAestheticsSymbolism Usability (.89) Aesthetics.03(.95) Symbolism.21*.72*(.92) # of Items 345 * p <.01 Table 2: Alpha reliabilities (on the diagonal),inter-variable correlations, and number of items for the three skin aspects

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.27 Regression Analysis Independent Variable DVAdj. R 2 UsabilityAestheticsSymbolism Satisfying Experience.68.56**.38**.23** Pleasant Experience.58.43**.22* * p <.01, ** p<.001 Table 3: Adjusted R 2 and standardized regression coefficients of the three skin aspects regressed on satisfying experience and pleasant experience.

Open-ended Responses Coded by two independent judges General Question* Kappa =.815 Choice Question # Kappa =.823 Usability77 (57.4%)53 (45.3%) Aesthetics19 (14.2%)46 (39.3%) Symbolism19 (14.2%)6 (5.1%) Other19 (14.2%)12 (10.3%) Overall134 (100%)117 (100%) Table 4: Number (percentage) of reasons provided for the general question and for the choice question, tabulated by skin aspect. *Main considerations in choosing a PC-based entertainment system #Reasons for choosing the most preferred skin

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.29 Final Choice 80% chose an alternative skin 80% chose an alternative skin

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.30 Vitruvian Principles of Architecture Firmitas Strength Durability Stability Utilitas Utility Convenience Venustas Beauty Grace

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.31 Why aesthetics matters?

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.32 Why aesthetics matters? Level of performance exceeds most users’ needs Level of performance exceeds most users’ needs Aesthetically-based valuations are immediate and hard to overcome Aesthetically-based valuations are immediate and hard to overcome Aesthetics satisfies basic human needs. Aesthetics satisfies basic human needs. Like it or not, it’s here to stay … Like it or not, it’s here to stay …

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.33 Conclusions Relevant research area Relevant research area Research is only at the beginning – needs replication and validation Research is only at the beginning – needs replication and validation Areas of extension Areas of extensionextension Multifaceted research – needs multiple approaches, visions, methodologies Multifaceted research – needs multiple approaches, visions, methodologies More food for thought …. More food for thought ….

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.34 An alternative (tentative) model of IT adoption EmotionCognition Expressive Aesthetics Classic Aesthetics Usability (EOU) Adoption SymbolismUsefulness

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.35

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.36 HCI (Nielsen, 1993) Utility: whether the functionality of the system in principle can do what is needed. Usability: ”a quality attribute that assesses how easy user interfaces are to use” MIS (Davis, 1989) Usefulness: the extent to which using the system will enhance job performance. Ease of use: the extent to which using the system will be free of effort

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.37 Source: Norman (1998)

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.38 Stimuli and Measures Measures Distance Keypad Type Grouping Sequence 1 Hand-Domin Sequence 2 Safety Aesthetics

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.39

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.40

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.41 Source: D. Norman, Emotional Design (2004) Aesthetics Usability Symbolism

Noam Tractinsky11/2003 Haifa U.42 A Framework for the Study of Aesthetics in Information Systems? IT Factors Aesthetic Processes: Cognition, Affect Relations to Other Variables : Perceptions, Attitudes, Performance, Satisfaction Moderators: System Type, Context, Culture, Personality Methodological Issues: Exploring the black box