790
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    4
    shares
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Conference Proceedings: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing User Interface Aesthetics based on the Inter-subjectivity of Judgment

      proceedings-article
      ,
      Proceedings of the 30th International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference (HCI)
      Fusion
      11 - 15 July 2016
      User interface aesthetics, metric-based evaluation, theory of measurement, visual design, visual principles
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            "How to assess user interface aesthetics?" remains a question faced by many user interface researchers and designers during the user interface development life cycle since aesthetics positively influence usability, user experience, pleasureability, and trust. Visual techniques borrowed from visual design suggest that the graphical user interface layout could be assessed by aesthetic metrics such as balance, symmetry, proportion, regularity, and simplicity, to name a few. Whereas different formulas exist for computing each aesthetic metric and different interpretations to sum up their results, no consensus exists today on how to consistently evaluate these metrics in a way that is aligned with human judgement, which is intrinsically subjective. In order to address the challenging alignment of human subjectivity with machine objectivity, this paper reports on an experiment comparing the results issued from the inter-subjectivity of judgment of fifteen participants evaluating four main aesthetic metrics on a sample of ten graphical user interfaces and the values of these metrics calculated semi-automatically by a web-based application. The experiment suggests that some metrics, e.g. symmetry, proportion, simplicity, as computed from the formula are actually positively correlated with human judgment, while some other metrics, such as balance, are surprisingly not correlated with the formula computed, thus indicating that another formula or another interpretation should be determined. Therefore, a new formula for computing balance is defined that decomposes balance into horizontal and vertical balances which re-establish a correlation. This paper then provides some new insights on how to rely on these aesthetic metrics and other related metrics, whether they are interpreted manually or computed automatically.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            Conference
            July 2016
            July 2016
            : 1-12
            Affiliations
            [0001]Université catholique de Louvain

            Louvain School of Management, LiLab

            Place des Doyens, 1 - 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
            Article
            10.14236/ewic/HCI2016.25
            4b68d9c0-10c0-4300-85c8-1cc6bc451304
            © Zen et al. Published by BCS Learning and Development Ltd. Proceedings of British HCI 2016 - Fusion, Bournemouth, UK

            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/

            Proceedings of the 30th International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference
            HCI
            30
            Bournemouth University, Poole, UK
            11 - 15 July 2016
            Electronic Workshops in Computing (eWiC)
            Fusion
            Product
            Product Information: 1477-9358BCS Learning & Development
            Self URI (article page): https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14236/ewic/HCI2016.25
            Self URI (journal page): https://ewic.bcs.org/
            Categories
            Electronic Workshops in Computing

            Applied computer science,Computer science,Security & Cryptology,Graphics & Multimedia design,General computer science,Human-computer-interaction
            User interface aesthetics,visual design,metric-based evaluation,visual principles,theory of measurement

            REFERENCES

            1. 2011 January Investigating effects of screen layout elements on interface and screen design aesthetics Adv. in Hum.-Comp. Int 2011 5:1 5:10

            2. 2006 June Economic and subjective measures of the perceived value of aesthetics and usability ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact 13 2 210 234

            3. 1908 The origin of the aesthetic emotion Sammelbande der Int. Musik 282 290

            4. 1997 Layout complexity: does it measure usability? Human-Computer Interact. INTERACT ’ 97 623 626 Springer US

            5. 1997 Preference data analysis using a paired comparison model Food quality and preference 8 5 353 358

            6. 1972 What is beautiful is good Journal of personality and social psychology 24 3 285

            7. 2014 January The interplay between usability and aesthetics: More evidence for the“what is usable is beautiful” notion Adv. in Hum.-Comp. Int 2014 15:15 15:15

            8. 1987 The Critique of judgment Hackett Publishing

            9. 1995 Apparent usability vs. inherent usability: experimental analysis on the determinants of the apparent usability Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems 292 293 ACM

            10. 2006 March Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behav Inf. Technol 25 2 115 126

            11. 2013 The evaluation of interface aesthetics Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia, Interaction, Design and Innovation, MIDI '13 New York, NY, USA 3:1 3:10 ACM

            12. 1997 Nov Visual and textual consistency checking tools for graphical user interfaces IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23 11 722 735

            13. 2010 Facets of visual aesthetics International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 68 10 689 709

            14. 2001 Another look at a model for evaluating interface aesthetics Int. J. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci 11 2 515 535

            15. 2000 Aesthetic measures for assessing graphic screens J. Inf. Sci. Eng 16 97 116

            16. 2003 Modelling interface aesthetics Information Sciences 152 25 46

            17. 1990 Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems 249 256 ACM

            18. 2005 Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things Basic books 2011 Are first impressions about websites only related to visual appeal? Proceedings of the 13th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-computer Interaction - Volume Part I INTERACT ’ 11 Berlin, Heidelberg 489 496 Springer-Verlag

            19. 2011 Investigating objective measures of web page aesthetics and usability Proceedings of the Twelfth Australasian User Interface Conference 117 AUIC ’ 11 Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia 19 28 Australian Computer Society, Inc.

            20. 2005 Free-marginal multirater kappa (multirater k [free]): An alternative to fleiss ’ fixed-marginal multirater kappa Joensuu University Learning and Instruction Symposium

            21. 2013 Predicting users ’ first impressions of website aesthetics with a quantification of perceived visual complexity and colorfulness Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. - CHI ’13 2049

            22. 2008 Aesthetics and credibility in web site design Information Processing & Management 44 1 386 399

            23. 2010a The effect of aesthetically pleasing composition on visual search performance Proc. 6th Nord. Conf. Human-Computer Interact. Extending Boundaries - Nord. ’10 422

            24. 2010b Preference ranking of screen layout principles Proceedings of the 2010 British Computer Society Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, BCS-HCI 2010 Dundee, United Kingdom 6-10 September 2010 81 87

            25. 2000 Aesthetics and preferences of web pages Behaviour & Information Technology 19 5 367 377

            26. 1993 July Layout appropriateness: a metric for evaluating user interface widget layout IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19 7 707 719

            27. 2014 Webpage saliency Computer Vision-ECCV 2014 33 46 Springer

            28. 2010 May The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: effects on user performance and perceived usability Appl. Ergon 41 3 403 10

            29. 2000 December What is beautiful is usable Interact. Comput 13 2 127 145

            30. 2012 November The role of visual complexity and prototypicality regarding first impression of websites: Working towards understanding aesthetic judgments Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud 70 11 794 811

            31. 1994 Visual techniques for traditional and multimedia layouts Proc. Work. Adv Vis. interfaces 95 104 ACM

            32. 2011 Probing a Self-Developed Aesthetics Measurement Application (SDA) in Measuring Aesthetics of Mandarin Learning Web Page Interfaces 8 1

            Comments

            Comment on this article