Outcome Variables

This section deals with what is probably the most practical question in relation to visual aesthetics in HCI: What are the effects of aesthetic perceptions and evaluations on HCI-related variables? Whereas the question of how aesthetic evaluations are formed is relatively general, the consequences of these evaluations can be highly domain-specific. Indeed, research in HCI primarily views the value of visual aesthetics, whether explicitly or implicitly, not as an end in itself but rather as a mediating force between (1) characteristics of the designed system or product, and (2a) other perceived attributes of the product or (2b) behavioral consequences of aesthetic evaluations. �Early studies (Kurasu and Kashimura, 1995, Tractinsky, 1997) offered intriguing findings regarding positive association between visual aesthetics and a focal HCI variable - usability. Despite the lack of clear indication about cause and effect, these studies hinted at what subsequent studies explored more directly: that people’s perceptions of a system’s beauty may impact perceptions of other system attributes, such as ease of use (Heijden, 2003; Cyr et al., 2006), overall satisfaction (Tractinsky et al., 2000; Lindgaard & Dudek, 2003; Cyr, 2008), preferences (Schmidt and Liu, 2009; Lee & Koubek, 2010) and even performance (Quinn & Tran, 2010, Sonderegger & Sauer, 2010).

While early research appeared to accept intuitively the premise that aesthetic evaluations are fast enough to precede evaluations of other related variables, later research has demonstrated that this is indeed the case (Lindgaard et al., 2006, Lindgaard et al. 2011; Tractinsky et al., 2006; see also Section 2.2 above). These findings have further motivated the exploration of potential consequences of aesthetic design, a research area which have probably been the busiest of the four categories outlined in our framework. The range of variables covered by these studies includes evaluations of other system attributes, overall evaluations of the system, attitudes towards organizations represented by the system, and satisfaction from the interaction. Studies have also begun exploring the role of affect and emotions in mediating how perceived aesthetics influence those outcomes. Below I survey several studies that examined visual aesthetics’ effects on various variables. The studies represent a partial and probably arbitrary list.

Affect and emotions are oft-cited corollaries of visual aesthetics. The effects of attractive and appealing design on emotions were demonstrated in various studies, including Thuring & Mahlke (2007) in the domain of portable music players, Porat and Tractinsky (2012) and Cai & Xu (2011) in the domain of online shopping. The importance of aesthetics’ effects on emotions is twofold. First, as mentioned earlier, positive affect contributes to positive experience and well-being, and as such is an end in itself. �Second, emotions have a role in affecting subsequent information processing, appraisal of other system attributes, and forming attitudes towards the system (Sun & Zhang, 2006).

Trustworthiness was a variable that was studied early as an outcome of visual design in the domain of online banking (Kim & Moon, 1998). �In other studies on website design, Cyr et al. (2010) found that web-site color appeal is a significant determinant of website trust, and Lindgaard et al. (2011) also found strong correlations between visual appeal and trust in websites. A related variable to trust� reputation of an academic department � was correlated with aesthetics in a study of websites (Hartmann et al., 2007).

The effects of visual appeal on perceived usability was examined in several studies. Lee & Koubek (2010) found high positive correlations between usability and aesthetics before and after use.� Like Tractinsky et al. (2000), they found that the effect of perceived aesthetics on perceived usability was stronger than the effect of objective performance on usability. Similar findings were obtained by Sauer & Sonderegger (2009). In another study,Sonderegger & Sauer (2010) found that participants using cell phones with high visual appeal rated them as more usable than participants using the unappealing devices. In a study of mobile phones, Quinn & Tran (2010) found that attractiveness accounted for as much variance in the SUS scores as effectiveness and efficiency. On the other hand, various studies found weaker or no such associations between visual aesthetics and usability (e.g., Lindgaard & Dudek, 2003, study 2; Hassenzahl, 2004a, Hassenzahl 2010; Thuring & Mahlke, 2007). The mixed findings suggest that the presumed association between perceptions of aesthetics and usability may not be universal. We elaborate on this point when we discuss the next category.

Visual aesthetics are considered a major force influencing perceptions of product character (Hassenzahl, 2003;Krippendorff, 2005) or brand personality (Park et al., 2005). It doesn’t come as a surprise, then, that in a study on product choice, most participants mentioned aesthetic and symbolic roles most often as affecting product choice (Creusen & Schoormans, 2005). Still in online environments, Mandel & Johnson (2002) found hat color and image-based priming� influenced online consumers’ product choice. And Schmitt and Liu (2009) found that users are willing to sacrifice loading speed for a more aesthetically appealing webpage.

Following Norman’s (Norman 2004) claim that “attractive things work better,” perhaps the most intriguing question regarding the outcomes of visual aesthetic is whether it influences not only users’ perceptions and evaluations of the system, but also their Performance. Recent studies have started looking for empirical evidence regarding this question (e.g., Moshagen et al., 2009). In a study of 11 data visualization techniques, Cawthon & Moere (2007) found positive relation between aesthetic data visualizations and performance of data retrieval tasks. Sonderegger and Sauer (2010) and Quinn and Tran (2010) similarly found more effective task performance when using attractive versus unattractive mobile phones. Van Schaik & Ling (2009), however, did not find relation between perceptions of classical and expressive aesthetics and performance measures.

Finally, it is important to note that visual aesthetics is considered a prominent antecedent of the concept of “User Experience” (Hassenzahl & Tractinsky, 2006; Sutcliffe, 2009; Law & Schaik, 2010). In a recent survey of the user experience (UX) literature, Bargas-Avila and Hornbaek (2011) found that emotions, enjoyment and aesthetics are the most frequently assessed dimensions of UX. Considering that aesthetics is also an antecedent of the other two dimensions, it appears that its role in influencing the UX is large indeed. To a large extent, it is related to almost all the ideas expressed in this chapter.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16