Marc Hassenzahl developed the AttrakDiff questionnaire (Table 1) to differentiate between pragmatic and hedonic usability, with an emphasis on beauty and goodness. The most common ways of measuring hedonic usability are with the AttrakDiff2, the UEQ, and the meCUE2.0 standardized questionnaires. Other refinements of hedonic quality include evocation (extent to which a product evokes memories) and stimulation (extent to which a product is perceived as challenging or novel). Perception of beauty, on the other hand, depended on a “hedonic attribute group” named Identification, associated with the way products communicate important personal values to relevant others. In response to other research into the relationship between perceived usability and beauty, Hassenzahl (2004) studied the relationship of usability (pragmatic and hedonic) with perceptions of beauty and goodness, concluding that perceptions of goodness were driven by both pragmatic and hedonic attributes, especially after use. The hedonic construct has multidimensional relationships with perceived beauty and goodness Furthermore, concurrent collection of SMEQ (Subjective Mental Effort Questionnaire) data revealed a significant correlation with pragmatic usability, but no significant correlation with hedonic usability-evidence of appropriate convergent and divergent validity for the measures. Alignment of items with factors generally was as expected and had good scale reliability, and there was almost equal contribution of pragmatic and hedonic measures to the prediction of product appealingness. The results of the 2001 paper were similar to the original findings. Scales derived from both the pragmatic and the hedonic items were significantly predictive of APPEAL, suggesting that appealingness of a product is affected by both pragmatic and hedonic aspects of user experience. Reliability for all three scales was high (coefficient alpha greater than. found evidence from factor analysis that the items in Table 1 aligned as expected with independent factors. Hedonic usability: hedonic quality, non-task-oriented quality, non-instrumental qualityįactor analysis supports the distinction between pragmatic and hedonic usability Pragmatic usability: pragmatic quality, ergonomic quality, perceived usability, task-oriented quality, instrumental product quality Although the most common current terms for these constructs are pragmatic and hedonic usability, they are also referred to as Table 1: AttrakDiff1 items for Pragmatic (Ergonomic), Hedonic, and APPEAL constructs.ĭifferent terms are used in the literature for pragmatic and hedonic usabilityĪs research programs move forward and branch along different paths, associated terminology is often not perfectly consistent. Table 1 shows the original set of bipolar adjectives for these constructs (the AttrakDiff1 questionnaire). In 20, Marc Hassenzahl and colleagues published research on a distinction between the concepts of pragmatic (classical) usability and hedonic usability, defined by a set of seven-point semantic differential items (such as interesting-boring and impressive-nondescript) collected concurrently with a measure of appealingness (APPEAL) so they could investigate the extent to which pragmatic and hedonic usability accounted for variation in the measurement of APPEAL. He proposed a “hedonic” quality that includes non-task-oriented aspects such as innovativeness, originality, and the subjective nature of “appealingness.” In the early 2000s, Marc Hassenzahl felt that the definition of usability, while broad, neglected the contribution of fun and enjoyment. What Is Hedonic Usability?īefore 2000, the industrial practitioners who worked on the development of products/systems for human use focused primarily on classical usability, assessing the extent to which designs led to successful and rapid task completion and high levels of satisfaction or perceived usability. In this article, we dive a little deeper into that distinction and discuss how the concepts of pragmatic and hedonic usability have themselves evolved over the past few decades. One of the forces driving the evolution of one major branch is the distinction between pragmatic and hedonic usability. We recently wrote about the evolution of three branches of standardized UX measurement from the 1970s to the present. What about aspects such as innovativeness, originality, or beauty? Do these matter? If so, how should they be measured? Usability testing tends to focus on the objective task-oriented performance quality of an experience. Is a usable experience sufficient for a good experience?Īssuming a product, website, or app does what it intends to do and is usable, is there anything more?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |