For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
59
views
0
references
 Top references
cited by
0
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      269
      similar
       All similar

      Studying business & IT? Drive your professional career forwards with BCS books - for a 20% discount click here: shop.bcs.org

      scite_
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Conference Proceedings: found
      Is Open Access

      Measuring UX at Work: A Diary Study of Healthcare Workers Ordinary Experiences with mHealth Apps

      Published
      proceedings-article
      Author(s): , , , , ,
      Publication date (Print):
      Conference name: 36th International BCS Human-Computer Interaction Conference (BCS HCI 23)
      Conference theme: The BCS Human-Computer Interaction Conference 2023 was co-located with the INTERACT 2023 conference, the theme of which was "Design for Equlity and Justice", as increasingly, computer science as a discipline is becoming concerned about issues of justice and equality – from fake news to rights for robots, from the ethics of driverless vehicles to the gamergate controversy. The BCS HCI Conference welcomed submissions on all aspects of human-computer interaction. Topics included: User Experience, usability testing and interaction design; Education and Health; Smart Energy, Smart Transport and the Internet of Things; Interaction Technologies and Applications.
      Conference date: 28–29 August 2023
      Keywords: Mobile Health Applications, mHealth apps, Healthcare Workers, User Experience, UX
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            This study investigates the user experience (UX) of healthcare workers (HCWs) when utilising mobile health applications (mHealth apps) in their daily work. It builds upon existing literature on UX, specifically focusing on UX at work, which encompasses the dynamic interplay between users, technology, contexts of use, and tasks. Data was collected over a period of fifteen days using the AttrakDiff instrument, a widely used UX measurement tool. The findings validate the suitability of AttrakDiff in the work context, with HCWs' responses aligning with its three-factor structure: Pragmatic Quality (PQ), Hedonic Quality Identification (HQI), and Hedonic Quality Stimulation (HQS). The trend in our data shows HCWs’ UX to be ordinary at the middle of the scale, and with little change over time. These findings align with previous research on ordinary UX and provide specific insights into the healthcare work domain. Furthermore, the study reveals that HQI has a stronger impact on attractiveness (ATT) compared to HQS, while PQ demonstrates a similar effect to HQS. These findings highlight the significance of prioritising the design of mHealth apps to emphasise hedonic qualities, thereby enhancing user satisfaction and fostering long-term engagement. By incorporating elements of enjoyment, pleasure, and user engagement, mHealth apps can provide more meaningful experiences beyond their functional utility. The study draws upon theoretical perspectives from UX and positive psychology, emphasising the importance of designing mHealth apps that prioritise pleasurable and engaging experiences to optimise user satisfaction and engagement.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            Nurha Yingta
            Parisa Saadati
            Jose Abdelnour-Nocera
            Obed Brew
            Torkil Clemmensen
            Ikram Ur Rehman
            Conference
            Publication date: August 2023
            Publication date (Print): August 2023
            Pages: 54-60
            Affiliations
            [0001]University of West London

            St Marry Road, Ealing, UK.
            [0002]University of West London

            ITI/Larsys, Funchal, Portugal
            [0003]Copenhagen Business School

            Howitzvej 60,4.11 DK.
            Article
            DOI: 10.14236/ewic/BCSHCI2023.7
            SO-VID: 49632ae8-4b45-4329-9d3a-1c15bd98112e
            Copyright © © Yingta et al. Published by BCS Learning and Development Ltd. Proceedings of BCS HCI 2023, UK
            License:

            This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

            Conference name: 36th International BCS Human-Computer Interaction Conference
            Conference acronym: BCS HCI 23
            Conference number: 36
            Conference location: University of York, UK
            Conference date: 28–29 August 2023
            Conference sponsor: Electronic Workshops in Computing (eWiC)
            Conference theme: The BCS Human-Computer Interaction Conference 2023 was co-located with the INTERACT 2023 conference, the theme of which was "Design for Equlity and Justice", as increasingly, computer science as a discipline is becoming concerned about issues of justice and equality – from fake news to rights for robots, from the ethics of driverless vehicles to the gamergate controversy. The BCS HCI Conference welcomed submissions on all aspects of human-computer interaction. Topics included: User Experience, usability testing and interaction design; Education and Health; Smart Energy, Smart Transport and the Internet of Things; Interaction Technologies and Applications.
            History
            Product

            1477-9358 BCS Learning & Development

            Self URI (article page): https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14236/ewic/BCSHCI2023.7
            Self URI (journal page): https://ewic.bcs.org/
            Categories
            Series title: Electronic Workshops in Computing

            ScienceOpen disciplines: Applied computer science,Computer science,Security & Cryptology,Graphics & Multimedia design,General computer science,Human-computer-interaction
            Keywords: User Experience,mHealth apps,UX,Healthcare Workers,Mobile Health Applications

            REFERENCES

            1. Chen, Y. et al. (2013) ‘A randomized controlled trial of the effects of brief mindfulness meditation on anxiety symptoms and systolic blood pressure in Chinese nursing students’, Nurse education today, 33(10), pp. 1166–1172. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2012.11.014.

            2. Clemmensen, T., Hertzum, M. and Abdelnour-Nocera, J. (2020) ‘Ordinary User Experiences at Work: A Study of Greenhouse Growers’, ACM transactions on computer-human interaction, 27(3), pp. 1–31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/3386089.

            3. Farao, J. et al. (2020) ‘A user-centred design framework for mHealth.’, PLoS ONE, 15(8), pp. 1–18. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237910.

            4. Fleming, T. et al. (2019) ‘The Importance of User Segmentation for Designing Digital Therapy for Adolescent Mental Health: Findings From Scoping Processes’, JMIR Mental Health. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2196/12656.

            5. Harbich, S. and Hassenzahl, M. (2017) ‘User Experience in the Work Domain: A Longitudinal Field Study’, Interacting with computers, 29(3), pp. 306–324. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww022.

            6. Hassenzahl, M. et al. (2000) ‘Hedonic and ergonomic quality aspects determine a software’s appeal’, in Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI00: Human Factors in Computing Systems, The Hague The Netherlands: ACM, pp. 201–208. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/332040.332432.

            7. Hassenzahl, M. (2001) ‘The Effect of Perceived Hedonic Quality on Product Appealingness’, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 13(4), pp. 481–499. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327590ijhc1304_07.

            8. Hassenzahl, M. (2003) ‘The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between User and Product’, in. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands (Funology), pp. 31–42. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2967-5_4.

            9. Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M. and Koller, F. (2003) ‘AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität’, Berichte des German Chapter of the ACM. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80058-9_19.

            10. Hassenzahl, M., Kekez, R. and Burmester, M. (no date) ‘The importance of a software’s pragmatic quality depends on usage modes’.

            11. Huberty, J. et al. (2019) ‘Efficacy of the Mindfulness Meditation Mobile App “Calm” to Reduce Stress Among College Students: Randomized Controlled Trial’, JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 7(6), p. e14273. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2196/14273 [doi].

            12. Kujala, S. et al. (2011) ‘UX Curve: A method for evaluating long-term user experience’, Interacting with computers, 23(5), pp. 473–483. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.06.005.

            13. Law, E. et al. (2009) ‘Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach’, in. ACM, pp. 719–728. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518813.

            14. Lu, Y. and Roto, V. (2016) ‘Design for Pride in the Workplace’, Psychology of well-being, 6(1), p. 6. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13612-016-0041-7.

            15. Medhanyie, A.A. et al. (2015) ‘Health workers’ experiences, barriers, preferences and motivating factors in using mHealth forms in Ethiopia’, Human Resources for Health, 13(1), p. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-13-2.

            16. Mira, J.J. et al. (2020) ‘Acute stress of the healthcare workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic evolution: a cross-sectional study in Spain’, BMJ Open. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042555.

            17. Neubert, T.-A. et al. (2018) ‘Designing a Tablet-Based Software App for Mapping Bodily Symptoms: Usability Evaluation and Reproducibility Analysis’, JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 6(5), p. e127. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8409.

            18. Ravalier, J.M., McVicar, A. and Boichat, C. (2020) ‘Work Stress in NHS Employees: A Mixed-Methods Study’, International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(18), p. 6464. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186464.

            19. Schrepp, M., Held, T. and Laugwitz, B. (2006) ‘The influence of hedonic quality on the attractiveness of user interfaces of business management software’, Interacting with computers, 18(5), pp. 1055–1069. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2006.01.002.

            20. Thomas Meneweger et al. (2018) ‘Factory workers’ ordinary user experiences’, Human Technology, 14(2), pp. 209–232. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201808103817.

            21. ‘Understanding Regression Analysis: An Introductory Guide. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 57 (2nd printing)’ (1988) PsycCRITIQUES, 33(1), pp. 84–84. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/025334.

            22. Vegt, N.J.H. et al. (2018) ‘A case study on gamified interventions for team cohesion in factory work’, Human Technology, 14(2), pp. 176–208. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201808103816.

            23. Vukasa Petrovic (2022) ‘Health Apps Usage Statistics’, Health Apps Usage Statistics, 6 December. Available at: https://vicert.com/blog/health-apps-usage-statistics/#:~:text=As%20of%20February%202022%2C%20over,t%20yet%20utilized%20this%20technology. (Accessed: 9 July 2023).

            24. Walsh, T. et al. (2014) ‘Axe UX: Exploring long-term user experience with iScale and AttrakDiff’, in. ACM, pp. 32–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/2676467.2676480.

            Comments

            Comment on this article