ABSTRACT
A theoretical framework for assessing the attractiveness of websites based on Adaptive Decision Making theory is introduced. The framework was developed into a questionnaire and used to evaluate three websites which shared the same brand and topic but differed in aesthetic design. The DSchool site was favoured overall and was best for aesthetics and usability. The subjective ratings of the sites were in conflict with the subject-reported comments on usability problems. Subjects were given two scenarios for their preference. They changed their preference from the DSchool to the HCI Group's site for the more serious (PhD study) scenario; however, design background students remained loyal to the DSchool. The implications of framing and halo effects on users' judgement of aesthetics are discussed.
- Blom, J., and Monk, A. 2003. Theory of personalization of appearance: Why users personalize their pcs and mobile phones. Human-Computer Interaction. 18. 3, 193--228. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Djajadiningrat, J. P., Overbeeke, C. J., and Wensveen, S. A. G., 2000. Augmenting fun and beauty: a pamphlet. In Proceedings Designing Augmented Reality Environments, DARE 2000 (Elsinore, Denmark). 131--134. Google ScholarDigital Library
- DeAngeli, A., Sutcliffe, A., and Hartmann, J., Interaction, usability and aesthetics: what influences users' preferences?, Proc. DIS 2006, ACM Press (2006), 271--280. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dourish, P. 2004. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Green, W. S., and Jordan, P. W. 2001. Pleasure with Products: Beyond Usability. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
- Hallnäs, L., and Redström, J. 2002. From use to presence: On the expression of aesthetics of everyday computational things. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 9. 2, 106--124. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hassenzahl, M. 2004. The interplay of beauty, goodness and usability in interactive products. Human-Computer Interaction. 19. 4, 319--349. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hassenzahl, M., Platz, A., Burmester, M., and Lehner, K., 2000. Hedonic and ergonomic quality aspects determine a software's appeal. In CHI 2000 Conference Proceedings Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (The Hague) T. Turner, G. Szwillus, M. Czerwinski and F. Paterno (Eds), ACM Press, New York, 201--208. Google ScholarDigital Library
- ISO. 1997. ISO 9241: Ergonomic Requirements for Office Systems with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs). International Standards Organisation.Google Scholar
- Ivory, M., and Hearst, M. 2001. The state of the art in automated usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Computing Surveys. 33. 4, 173--197. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kim, J., Lee, J., and Choi, D. 2003. Designing emotionally evocative home pages: An empirical study of the quantative relations between design factors and rmotional dimensions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 59. 6, 899--940. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lavie, T., and Tractinsky, N. 2004. Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of websites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 60. 3, 269--298. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lindegaard, G., and Dudek, C. 2003. What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? Interacting with Computers. 15. 3, 429--452.Google Scholar
- Lynch, P. J., and Horton, S. 2001. Web Style Guidelines (2nd ed.). Yale University Press, New Haven CT.Google Scholar
- McCarthy, J., and Wright, P. 2005. Technology As Experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Merrilees, B. and Fry, M.-L. 2002. Corporate branding: A framework for e-retailers. Corporate Reputation Review, 5, 213--225.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mullet, K., and Sano, D. 1995. Designing Visual Interfaces: Communication Oriented Techniques. SunSoft Press, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nielsen, J. 2000. Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. New Riders, New York. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nielsen, J., and Molich, R. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. SIGCHI Bulletin. April: special issue, 249--256.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. A. 2004. Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Park, S., Choi, D., and Kim, J. 2004. Critical factors for the aesthetic fidelity of web pages: Empirical studies with professional web designers and users. Interacting with Computers. 16. 2, 351--376.Google Scholar
- Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., and Johnson, E. J. 1993. The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Petersen, M. G., Iversen, O. S., Krogh, P. G., and Ludvigsen, M., 2004. Aesthetic interaction: a pragmatist's aesthetics of interactive systems. In Proceedings 2004 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques (Cambridge MA). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shusterman, R. 1992. Pragmatist Aesthetics, Living Beauty, Rethinking Art. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
- Spool, J. M., Scanlon, T., Snyder, C., Schroeder, W., and DeAngelo, T. 1999. Website Usability: A Designer's Guide. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sutcliffe, A. G., 2002. Heuristic evaluation of website attractiveness and usability. In Proceedings 8th Workshop on Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems (Glasgow), C. W. Johnson, Ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 188--199. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sutcliffe, A. G., and De Angeli, A., 2005. Assessing interaction styles in web user interfaces. In Proceedings Human Computer Interaction -- Interact 2005 (Rome) M. F. Costabile, F. Paterno (Eds). Springer Verlag, Berlin, 405--417. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tractinsky, N., 1997. Aesthetics and apparent usability: empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues. In Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 97 Conference Proceedings (Atlanta GA), Pemberton S. (Ed.) ACM Press, New York, 115--122. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tractinsky, N., Shoval-Katz, A., and Ikar, D. 2000. What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers. 13. 2, 127--145.Google Scholar
- Tractinsky, N., and Zmiri, D., 2006. Exploring Attributes of Skins as Potential Antecedents of Emotion in HCI. In Aesthetic Computing, Fishwick, P. (Ed), MIT Press Cambridge, MA, 405--421.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Investigating attractiveness in web user interfaces
Recommendations
Effect of perceived attractiveness of web interface design on visual search of web sites
CHINZ '05: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI New Zealand chapter's international conference on Computer-human interaction: making CHI naturalSix web designs varying only in colour combinations were shown to the participants prior to the experiment in order to elicit individual perceptions of attractiveness. Participants then performed a visual search task on mock web sites employing the most ...
Improving performance, perceived usability, and aesthetics with culturally adaptive user interfaces
When we investigate the usability and aesthetics of user interfaces, we rarely take into account that what users perceive as beautiful and usable strongly depends on their cultural background. In this paper, we argue that it is not feasible to design ...
Exploring the boundary conditions of the effect of aesthetics on perceived usability
A growing body of usability research suggests that the aesthetics of a system affects users' perceptions of the usability of that system. But the causal relationship between aesthetics and usability and the direction of that relation have not been ...
Comments