Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Developing an instrument to assess the impact of attitude and social norms on user selection of an interface design: a repertory grid approach Willem-Paul.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Developing an instrument to assess the impact of attitude and social norms on user selection of an interface design: a repertory grid approach Willem-Paul."— Presentation transcript:

1 Developing an instrument to assess the impact of attitude and social norms on user selection of an interface design: a repertory grid approach Willem-Paul Brinkman Steve Love

2 Topics  Research Motivation  Repertory Grid Analysis – initial instrument  Survey – validation instrument  Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection  Conclusions & Future Research

3 Ultimate aim is to understand why people select a specific design for their device. Motivation

4 User Personality Intention of selecting a specific type of design  However, correlations were relatively small (Brinkman and Fine, 2005)  A less direct approach is needed as users might have different criteria to evaluate a design. Because of colour or theme

5 Motivation Attitude towards selecting a specific design type Subjective Norm Relative importance Adoption of Theory of Reason Action (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) Intention of selecting a specific type of design User Personality

6 Research questions 1.What criteria do people use to evaluate a design? 2.What impact do attitude and social norm have on the selection of a design? Motivation

7 Different social context 1.Public application (mobile phone)? 2.Private application (PC multimedia player)? Motivation

8 Aim - Develop two evaluation instruments to assess people’s attitude and social norm towards: 1.Mobile phone 2.PC Multimedia Player Skins First question: what criteria do people use to evaluate a phone or Multimedia Player Skin? Motivation

9 Repertory Grid Analysis  Personal Construct Theory: Everyone interprets (or constructs) events and their universe differently.  Constructs are bipolar, for example to describe friends: easy-going versus tense, reliable versus unreliable. etc  Repertory Grid Analysis: a method to elicit these specific constructs. George Kelly

10 Repertory Grid Analysis General Procedure  Split up triad into 2 groups  Label the groups  Rate the object on construct  Create Grid

11 Repertory Grid Analysis General Procedure  Split up triad into 2 groups  Label the groups  Rate the object on construct  Create Grid Male Female

12 Repertory Grid Analysis General Procedure  Split up triad into 2 groups  Label the groups  Rate the object on construct  Create Grid MaleFemale

13 Repertory Grid Analysis General Procedure  Split up triad into 2 groups  Label the groups  Rate the object on construct  Create Grid  Looking for similarities between the constructs  Apply a Factor Analysis

14 Repertory Grid Analysis Method  Participants  Material  Procedure  20 Participants  Brunel University Students or Staff members  10 males, 10 females  Mean age of 26.5 years (SD = 4.84)

15 Repertory Grid Analysis Method  Participants  Material  Procedure Photo of 15 mobile phones taken from Mobile Digest news website.

16 Repertory Grid Analysis Method  Participants  Material  Procedure Screen prints from 15 skins taken from earlier study (Brinkman and Fine, 2005)

17 Repertory Grid Analysis Method  Participants  Material  Procedure  Two sessions: Mobile phone and Skins  Sequence of the sessions was counterbalanced  10 randomly drawn triads, with no repeating triads  Afterwards rating the phone and skins on the 10 constructs  Total interview took around 2 hours

18 Repertory Grid Analysis Analysis  Data  Rules  Mobile Phone  Skins  200 mobile phone and 200 skin constructs  Factor Analysis used principal-component extraction method and varimax rotation  Aim -> to identify common constructs themes used by multiple participants.

19 Repertory Grid Analysis Analysis  Data  Rules  Mobile Phone  Skins Selection criteria to select component 1.Factor loadings (correlations) below 0.69 were ignored. 2.Components should have constructs loading from at least 5 different participants 3.A clear semantic relationship between the labels of the construct should exist.

20 Repertory Grid Analysis Analysis  Data  Rules  Mobile Phone  Skins 3 Components / dimensions Appearance of the mobile phone

21 Repertory Grid Analysis Analysis  Data  Rules  Mobile Phone  Skins 4 Components / Dimensions

22 Survey  Aim  Procedure  Participants  Analysis  Results Validate the scales obtained from the Repertory Gird Analysis

23 Survey  Aim  Procedure  Participants  Analysis  Results To evaluate the middle mobile phone/skin with the scales provided

24 Survey  Aim  Procedure  Participants  Analysis  Results  156 students of the School of Information Systems, Computing and Mathematics (Brunel, UK)  Average age 23.6 years (SD = 4.79)  57 female, 75 male (24 did not report gender)

25 Survey  Aim  Procedure  Participants  Analysis  Results  Reliability analysis to examine the internal consistency of the scales within dimension  Dimension “Reliability” for mobile phone removed Cronbach’s alpha < 0.7  Factor Analysis  Component with Eigen value > 1  Scales loading > 0.7

26 Survey  Aim  Procedure  Participants  Analysis  Results Scales for Mobile Phones Scales for Multimedia Player skins

27 Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection Attitude towards selecting a specific design type Subjective Norm Intention of selecting a specific type of design Second question: What impact do attitude and social norm have on the selection of a design? Additional information collecting in Grid interviews

28  Attitude  Social Norm  Intention  Results  The evaluation (e) of a skin/phone on a scale.  The importance of an evaluation scale (w).  For me, having a skin that is “explaining”, or that is associated with this is? Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection BadGood

29  Attitude  Social Norm  Intention  Results  Their belief (b) on how peers, family members, or authority figures would their (participants) phone or skin to score on a construct.  Their willingness (g) to comply with the peers, family members, or authority figure. Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection

30  Attitude  Social Norm  Intention  Results  Behavioural intention to select a skin or mobile phone  I would try this on my media player?  I intend to obtain the following mobile phone? Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection unlikelylikely

31  Attitude  Social Norm  Intention  Results Social Norm has an impact on phone selection, but not skin selection. Attitude, Social Norm and Design Selection Phone (public)Skin (private) Mean (partial) correlation. *p.<.05.**p<.01.

32 Research questions 1.What criteria do people use to evaluate a design? 1.Mobile phone: Gender, Ease of Use and Sophistication 2.Multimedia Player skins: Stimulation and Ease 2.What impact do attitude and social norm have on the selection of a design? Social Norm has an impact on phone (public device) selection, but not Multimedia Player (private device) selection. Conclusions

33 Further research Attitude towards selecting a specific design type Subjective Norm Relative importance Intention of selecting a specific type of design User properties User Personality Gender

34 Questions Thanks for your attention


Download ppt "Developing an instrument to assess the impact of attitude and social norms on user selection of an interface design: a repertory grid approach Willem-Paul."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google