Expectations and Endurability – Measuring Fun

Expectations and Endurability – Measuring Fun Janet C Read Stuart J MacFarlane Chris Casey University of Central Lancashire, Preston Computers and Fun 2001

Where is this coming from? • PhD study of novel interfaces with children • Evaluation of interfaces for children • Usability studies • Efficiency • Effectiveness • Satisfaction Computers and Fun 2001

Satisfaction Measuring with children • Previous work • Read, J. C., & MacFarlane, S. J. (2000). Measuring Fun. Computers and Fun 3, York, England. • Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., & Casey, C. (2001). Measuring the Usability of Text Input Methods for Children. HCI2001, Lille. • Hanna, L., Risden, K., & Alexander, K., J. (1997). Guidelines for usability testing with children. Interactions, 1997(5), 9-14. Computers and Fun 2001

Theories of Satisfaction • Henry, J. W., & Stone, R. W. (1995). The Impacts of End-User Gender, Education, Performance, and System Use on Computer Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectancy. • Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory Computers and Fun 2001

Previous findings • ‘Likert’ scales, Rep Grid, Observations • It’s all brilliant!!!!!!!!! • Younger children cannot easily differentiate between constructs • Observation is intrusive Computers and Fun 2001

Expectancy Theory • Does expectation give any clues about how good something is? • High expectation + okay = let down • Low expectation + okay = made up • High expectation + good = brilliant Computers and Fun 2001

Prior Expectations Discrepancy with Expectations Post-hoc Perceptions Discrepancy with Desires Prior Desires Desires and Expectations • Chin & Lee (2000) Computers and Fun 2001

Endurability What’s too painful to remember, we simply choose to forget…the laughter..we will remember……………‘The way we were’ ‘Pollyanna Principle’ Matlin and Stang, (1978) Computers and Fun 2001

Method • 45 (41) Children aged 8 – 10 were going on a school trip Computers and Fun 2001

Phase 1 – Phase 2 (Likert scales) • Questionnaires • Comprising 3 questions and a smiley face ‘Likert’ scale. Computers and Fun 2001

Results from Phase 1 and Phase 2 • 59% Brilliant all the way – Brilliant before, brilliant afterwards76% Got what they expected20% changed their score by 1 pointOnly 4% children changed their score by 2 points96% got almost what they expected! Computers and Fun 2001

Computers and Fun 2001

Phase 3 - Recollections • Children were asked to recall the activities they had done. • At the same time, they were asked to recall what they had liked best – this had been asked previously – just after the event Computers and Fun 2001

Results from Phase 3 • 81% recalled the thing that they had identified as liking best directly after the event (3 weeks previously) • 63% said that the thing they liked the best was the same as the thing identified as liking the best directly after the event Computers and Fun 2001

Phase 4 • Repertory Grid constructed by the children, two constructs • Most fun • Most interesting • A list of activities was provided for the children to place on the grids – thus introducing some constraints Computers and Fun 2001

Comments • Children filled in in two ways • Scan and place from top down • Filling from top and bottom, • Some of the top bottom fillers gave up in the middle • Some of the top downers gave up before the end • All were clear about the differences in the constructs Computers and Fun 2001

Results from Phase 4 • The most fun / most interesting components were compared with the statements about what they liked best. • 33% of the responses were the same as had been previously recorded. • These results had limited value due to the fact that 43% had noted something as most fun which was not offered on the rep grid list. Computers and Fun 2001

Phase 5 – Desire to do-it-all-again • If we had the chance to do it all again..tell me would we…could we?.. ‘The Way we Were’ • Children were given the same list of activities as for the rep grid, and were asked to score them for ‘doing it again’ – three choices, yes, maybe, no Computers and Fun 2001

Results from phase 5 • This worked quite well, children were able to make decisions and seemed to understand what was going on with the metric Computers and Fun 2001

Doing it again vs. order in rep grid Computers and Fun 2001

Observations • Children got what they expected • Children remembered the thing they liked best • The desire to do-it–all-again matched the order of perceived fun for individual activities Computers and Fun 2001

A sensible suite of fun measures • Observations (when not intrusive) • Do-it-all-again Grid (easier for the children to complete than the rep grid, and may be better suited for younger children) • Likert before and after Computers and Fun 2001

Can it be that it was all so simple? • Desire / Expectation model relies on abstract thought, for children aspiration relates to the sum of the best parts of their previous experiences • Children remember less bad things than adults – due to a lack of depressive states! • Children remember good experiences Computers and Fun 2001

Or has time re-written every line? • Bewitchment • Kindness • Desire to please Computers and Fun 2001

Future work • Age 10 / 11 – start of abstract thought.. • Less attractive event – less bewitchment • Apply to a pen interface usability trial Computers and Fun 2001

Scattered pictures….. Of the smiles we left behind!!!! Smiles we gave to one another… JCRead@uclan.ac.uk Computers and Fun 2001

Expectations and Endurability – Measuring Fun