[Usability] Civilised user interfaces

[Callum McKenzie <callum physics otago ac nz>]

>From the food-for-thought department:

It should be obvious that if the software is nice to the user then they
will react better to it. However, I found this article interesting in
that it actually tests this idea:

Jeng-Yi Tzeng, "Toward a more civilized design: studying the effects of
computers that apologize", International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies, 61 p319-345 September 2004

Abstract:

"While it is difficult to create completely error-free interactions
in software design, the issue of how to make users feel better when
they encounter errors is critical to the concept of user- centered
design. Neilsen argued for offering a slightly apologetic statement
before an error message provided by web servers, but the notion of a
computer apologizing to its users inevitably triggers a debate about
the appropriateness of providing humanized messages to users. To
understand how users react to computers' apologies (presented by
textual or visual formats), a computer-guessing game was designed to
test users' reactions. The game features three treatments (difficulty
levels, feedback types, and emotional icons), each having two levels
(difficult vs. easy, apologetic feedback vs. non-apologetic feedback,
with emotional icons vs.  without emotional icons). Two-hundred and
sixty nine high school students participated in this study and were
randomly assigned to one of eight groups. The results show that while
the computers' actual performances still dominated the users'
assessments of the program, the computer apologies help to create more
desirable psychological experiences for the users, and emotional icons
help to improve the aesthetic quality of the program."

>From the conclusions (I like the last sentence):

"In this study, a computer-based guessing game with minor flaws
deliberately inserted into the interaction process was designed to
present a frustration-prone environment, which simulates people's
experiences of using computers in daily life.  In particular, the
frustrations purposefully designed for the subjects were an
unattractive or unclear interface, error-prone interactions,
ineffective help, and an unskillful design, etc. While most of the
subjects were somewhat frustrated with their performances, by means of
apologies, the computers voluntarily claimed the responsibility in
order to ameliorate the negative emotions that the subjects might
otherwise have directed toward themselves or toward the program. As
shown in the findings, although the offered apologies and emoticons
neither helped the subjects to improve their performances nor
significantly altered the subjects' impressions of the program or of
their performances with it, these features did make the program look
or feel nicer. Essentially, offering apologetic feedback creates an
appearance of emotional user-centeredness for the computer, which may
make it more appealing to users. More importantly, an appropriate
apology did not cause the subjects to generate negative attitudes
toward the program (as much of the anti-anthropo- morphism literature
suggests would occur). Nor did it encourage the generation of
irresponsible attitudes regarding the use of computers, as Shneiderman
suggested."

It should be noted that these results may not work across all cultural
groups. I will leave it to you to decide how representative you think
Taiwanese high-school students are.

Most non-university people will have trouble getting hold of the
article, but the abstract and the excerpt above probably tell you all
you really need to know.

 - Callum