Upload
kwamena-appiah-kubi
View
208
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
„FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU...“
Group 3Christiana Kirsten
Christiane Kwamena
TwinTide AUtumn Training SchOol 2013:
REsearch Methods for Human-Computer Interaction (TUTOREM 2013)
http://www.adriansnood.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Firstimpressions.jpg
http://www.adriansnood.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Firstimpressions.jpg
THE FIRST IMPRESSION
studies showed: 50 ms is enough to make a reliable first impression of a website
How crucial is it to make a good first impression?
Primary proposer: Dr. Alexandre Tuch
http://www.designdecoy.com/5-ways-smart-businesses-make-great-first-impression
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
How does a first impression with a website effect how users rate it after an error?
How does prior error with a website effect user‘s first impressions of a visually similar website?
METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
positivist experimental approach (quantitative)
establish whether the effect occurs
variables have been proven to be measurable
interpretist approach (qualitative)
establish causes why the phenomena occurred
explain any effect found
Good impression WS
very good first impression, could lead to
high expectations
which then might lead to
big disappointment after an error occurs
appe
al sc
ale
very good
very bad
Average impression WS
moderate first impression, could prevent the development of
high expectations
which then might lead to
less disappointment after an error occurs
appe
al sc
ale
very good
very bad
H0: an error has no effect on the appeal rating
H1: very good impressions will lead to a large drop in appeal rating after an error
H2: very good impressions will lead to a significantly larger drop in appeal rating after an error than average impressions
HYPOTHESES
Good impression WSSimilar good impression WSAverage impression WSSimilar average impression WS
appe
al sc
ale
very good
very badPhase 2: within-subjects
HYPOTHESES
H0: an error has no effect on ratings of visually similar websites
H1: following an error in a good impression website, a visually similar website will be rated lower than the initial one
H2: following an error in an average impression website, a visually similar website will not be rated significantly lower than the initial one
STUDY
Participants
Materials
Design
Analysis
n = 100, randomly recruited, familiar with IT, no experience with web design
desktop computers, 12 websites (collected through a pre-study of appeal rating and visual similarity)
Phase #1: between-subjectsPhase #2: within subjects
independent variable: appeal of website with error (good / average)dependent variable: appeal rating (first impression, after error, first impression of visually similar WS)
ANOVA
appeal scale
50 ms
3 random WS(rated for appeal)
appeal scale
appeal scale
50 ms
60 s, then error
5 random WS(rated for appeal)
PROCEDURE
CONTRIBUTIONS TO HCI
„Keep your promises!“
first impression may not be the most important thing to strive for - one should live up to the expectations one evokes
„Don‘t be a copycat!“
if the copied (popular) website fails, this might impact the first impression of your website
your website might promise more, than you can deliver
RISKS
confounding variables:
error was not attributed to the website
worse appeal of visually similar website was not caused by the prior error
scale might be inappropriate to measure appeal after interaction
Qualitative follow-up study may clarify this