skip to main content
10.1145/2829875.2829921acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesinteraccionConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Towards the Characterization of Interaction Quality

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Interaction Quality is an important issue for any kind of application, and of course the design of the user interface adaptation facilities of an application should consider quality aspects too. Neglecting quality assessment can easily produce applications that do not meet users nor designers expectations. In this sense, previous works have illustrated how to consider quality in a user interface adaptation framework, such as ISATINE, i.e. how to contemplate Quality of Adaptation in each stage of this framework. The many facets of the concept of Quality of Adaptation have been analyzed, and it has been also proposed its decomposition into four types of interaction quality: Expected Quality of adaptation, Wished Quality of adaptation, Achieved Quality of adaptation, and Perceived Quality of adaptation. Furthermore, which of these types of quality are involved in every stage of ISATINE has been also described. However, what is the idea both users and developers have about Interaction Quality? Have they use the same terminology to refer to it? These are the questions that we attempt to answer with this work which presents a study about the characterization of Interaction Quality, namely about Expected and Wished Quality. Thus the aim of this work is to better understand the quality preferences of users, allowing developers to design software products much more attractive for them.

References

  1. G. Cockton, "Some Critical Remarks on Abstractions for Adaptable Dialogue Managers" in 3rd Conf. of the British Comp. Society HCI Specialist Group, 1987, pp. 325--343. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. R. Oppermann, "Adaptively supported Adaptability" Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 455--472, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. H. Dieterich, U. Malinowski, T. Kühme, and M. Schneider-Hufschmidt, "State of the Art in Adaptive User Interfaces" in Adaptive UIs: Principles and Practice, 1993, pp. 13--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. V. López-Jaquero, F. Montero, P. González, "Quality of Adaptation: User Cognitive Models in Adaptation Quality Assessment" Comp.-Aided Des. of UIs VI, 2008, pp. 265--275.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. ISO, "ISO 9000 - Quality management systems - Fundamentals and vocabulary" 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. C. Roda, V. López-Jaquero, F. Montero, "Avanzando Hacia la Consideración de la Calidad de Adaptación en ISATINE," in XV Int. Conf. on HCI, 2014, pp. 312--315.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards the Characterization of Interaction Quality

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      Interacción '15: Proceedings of the XVI International Conference on Human Computer Interaction
      September 2015
      287 pages
      ISBN:9781450334631
      DOI:10.1145/2829875

      Copyright © 2015 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 September 2015

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • extended-abstract
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate109of163submissions,67%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader