Katharina Reinecke
Abraham Bernstein
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
When we investigate the usability and aesthetics of user interfaces, we rarely take into account that what users perceive as beautiful and usable strongly depends on their cultural background. In this paper, we argue that it is not feasible to design one interface that appeals to all users of an increasingly global audience. Instead, we propose to design culturally adaptive systems, which automatically generate personalized interfaces that correspond to cultural preferences. In an evaluation of one such system, we demonstrate that a majority of international participants preferred their personalized versions over a nonadapted interface of the same Website. Results show that users were 22% faster using the culturally adapted interface, needed fewer clicks, and made fewer errors, in line with subjective results demonstrating that they found the adapted version significantly easier to use. Our findings show that interfaces that adapt to cultural preferences can immensely increase the user experience.
- Ackerman, S. 2002. Mapping user interface design to culture dimensions. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Internationalization of Products and Systems (IWIPS'02).Google Scholar
- Badre, A. 2000. The effects of cross cultural interface design orientation on World Wide Web user performance. GVU Tech. rep.Google Scholar
- Barber, W. and Badre, A. 1998. Culturability: The merging of culture and usability. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors and the Web.Google Scholar
- Baumgartner, V.-J. 2003. A practical set of cultural dimensions for global user-interface analysis and design. M.S. thesis, Fachhochschule Joanneum, Austria.Google Scholar
- Ben-Bassat, T., Meyer, J., and Tractinsky, N. 2006. Economic and subjective measures of the perceived value of aesthetics and usability. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 13, 2, 210--234. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Benjamini, Y. and Hochberg, Y. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Royal Stat. Soc. Series B Method. 57, 1.Google Scholar
- Benyon, D. 1993. Adaptive systems: A Solution to usability problems. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 3, 65--87.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bloch, P. 1995. Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response. J. Market. 59, 3, 16--29.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bourges-Waldegg, P. and Scrivener, A. 1998. Meaning: the central issue in cross-cultural HCI design.Interact. Comput. 9, 3, 287--309.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Burgmann, 1., Kitchen, P., and Williams, R. 2006. Does culture matter on the Web? Market. Intel. Plan. 24, 1,62--73.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Callahan, E. 2005. Cultural similarities and differences in the design of university Websites.J. Comput.-Mediat. Comm. 11, 1.Google Scholar
- Cha, H., Oshlyansky, L., and Cairns, P. 2005. Mobile phone preferences and values: The U.K. vs. Korea. InProceedings of the International Workshop on Internationalization of Products and Systems (IWIPS).Google Scholar
- Choi, B., Lee, I., Kim, J., and Jeon, Y. 2005. A qualitative cross-national study of cultural influences on mobile data service design. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'05). 661--670. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Corbitt, B., Thanasankit, T., and Haynes, J. 2002. A model for culturally informed web interfaces. In Internet Management Issues: A Global Perspective, IGI Global, 1--26. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cronbach, L. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 297--334.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dolog, P. and Nejdl, W. 2003. Personalisation in Elena: How to cope with personalisation in distributed eLearning networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Worldwide Coherent Workforce, Satisfied Users—New Services For Scientific Information.Google Scholar
- Dormann, C. and Chisalita, C. 2002. Cultural values in Web site design. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics.Google Scholar
- Findlater, L. and McGrenere, J. 2008. Impact of screen size on performance, awareness, and user satisfaction with adaptive graphical user interfaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'08). 1247--1256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Findlater, L., Moffatt, K., McGrenere, J., and Dawson, J. 2009. Ephemeral adaptation: The use of gradual onset to improve menu selection performance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'09). 1655--1664. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ford, G. and Gelderblom, H. 2003. The effects of culture on performance achieved through the use of human computer interaction. In Proceedings of the Conference on Enablement Through Technology. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gajos, K., Wobbrock, J., and Weld, D. S. 2008. Improving the performance of motor-impaired users with automatically-generated, ability-based interfaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'08). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gould, E., Zakaria, N., and Yusof, S. 2000. Applying culture to Website design: A comparison of Malaysian and U.S. Websites. In Proceedings of theJoint IEEE International and 18th Annual Conference on Computer Documentation. 161--171. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Greenberg, S. and Witten, I. 1985. Adaptive personalized interfaces: A question of viability. Behav. Inform. Techn. 4, 31--45.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gupta, A. and Ferguson, J. 1997. Anthropological Locations: Boundaries and Grounds of a Field Science. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
- Hassenzahl, M. 2004. The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 19, 4, 319--349. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., and Koller, F. 2003. AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualitat. In Mensch & Computer 2003: Interaktion in Bewegung, 187--196.Google Scholar
- Hassenzahl, M., Platz, A., Burmester, M., and Lehner, K. 2000. Hedonic and Ergonomic Quality Aspects Determine a Software's Appeal. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'00). 201--208. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Heimgärtner, R. 2005. Towards cross-cultural adaptive human-machine-interaction in automotive navigation systems. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Internationalisation of Products and Systems. 97--111.Google Scholar
- Heimgärtner, R., Tiede, L.-W., Leimbach, J., Zehner, S., and Windl, H. 2007. Towards cultural adaptability to broaden universal access in future interfaces of driver information systems. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction: Ambient Interaction. 383--392. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hermeking, M. 2005. Culture and Internet consumption: Contributions from cross-cultural marketing and advertising research. J. Comput.-Mediat. Comm. 11, 1.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hodemacher, D., Jarman, F., and Mandl, T. 2005. Kultur und Web-Design: Ein empirischer Vergleich zwischen Grossbritannien und Deutschland. In Proceedings of the Conference Mensch und Computer 2005. Kunst und Wissenschaft, Grenzilberschreitungen der interaktiven, Art, 93--101.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. 1986. Cultural differences in teaching and learning. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 10, 301--320.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hofstede, G. 1997. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors and Organizations across Nations 2nd Ed. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Hook, K. 1997. Evaluating the utility and usability of an adaptive hypermedia system. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Google ScholarDigital Library
- International Standard Organization. 1997. ISO 9241-11: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs): Guidance on usability.Google Scholar
- Ito, M. and Nakakoji, K. 1996. Impact of culture on user interface design. In International User Interfaces, Wiley, 105--126. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kamentz, E. 2006. Adaptivität von Hypermedialen Lernsystemen: Ein Vorgehensmodell fur die Konzeption einer Benutzermodellierungskomponente unter Berucksichtigung Kulturbedingter Benutzereigenschaften. Ph.D. thesis, University of Hildesheim.Google Scholar
- Kamentz, E., Womser-Hacker, C., G. Szwillus, and Ziegler, J. 2003. Lerntheorie und Kultur: eine Voruntersuchung für die Entwicklung von Lernsystemen für internationale Zielgruppen. In Proceedings of the Conference “Mensch und Computer”. 349--358.Google Scholar
- Kersten, G., Kersten, M., and Rakowski, W. 2002. Software and culture: Beyond the internationalization of the interface. J. Glob. Inform. Manage. 10.Google Scholar
- Kondratova, I. and Goldfarb, I. 2006. Cultural interface design: Global colors study. In Proceedings of the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems, OTM'06 Workshops. Springer, 926--934. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kroeber, A. and Kluckhohn, C. 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Vintage Books.Google Scholar
- Lavie, T. and Tractinsky, N. 2004. Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of Web sites. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 60, 3, 269--298. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lindgaard, G. 2007. Aesthetics, Visual Appeal, Usability and User Satisfaction: What Do the User's Eyes Tell the User's Brain? Austral. J. Emerg. Techn. Soc. 5, 1, 1--14.Google Scholar
- Lindgaard, G. and Dudek, C. 2003. What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? Interact. Comput. 15, 3, 429--452.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., and Brown, J. 2006. Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression) Behav. Inform. Techn. 25, 2, 115--126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marcus, A. 2000. International and intercultural user interfaces. In User Interfaces for All, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York, 47--63.Google Scholar
- Marcus, A. and Baumgartner, V.-J. 2004. A practical set of culture dimensions for global user interface development. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Human Interaction. 252--261.Google Scholar
- Marcus, A. and Gould, E. W. 2000. Crosscurrents: cultural dimensions and global Web user-interface design. ACM Interact. 7, 4, 32--46. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Marcus, A. and Gould, E. W. 2001. Cultural dimensions and global web design: What? So what? Now what? In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors and the Web.Google Scholar
- McSweeney, B. 2002. Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences. Hum. Relat. 55, 1, 89--118.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mehta, B. and Nejdl, W. 2007. Intelligent distributed user modeling: from semantics to learning. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Ubiquitous and Decentralized User Modeling.Google Scholar
- Nisbett, R. 2003. The Geography of Thought. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. A. 2004. Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nunally, J. and Bernstein, I. 1994. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.Google Scholar
- O'Neill-Brown, P. 1997. Setting the stage for the culturally adaptive agent. In Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Socially Intelligent Agents.Google Scholar
- Oshlyansky, L., Cairns, P., and Thimbleby, H. 2007. Validating the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) tool cross-culturally. In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reinecke, K. 2005. A learning platform for the education of agricultural advisers in Rwanda. M.S. thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Koblenz, Germany.Google Scholar
- Reinecke, K. and Bernstein, A. 2007. Culturally adaptive software: Moving beyond internationalization. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reinecke, K. and Bernstein, A. 2008. Predicting user interface preferences of culturally ambiguous users. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM Digital Library. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reinecke, K. and Bernstein, A. 2009. Tell me where you've lived, and i'll tell you what you like: Adapting interfaces to cultural preferences. In Proceedings of the International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (UMAP). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reinecke, K., Reif, G., and Bernstein, A. 2007. Cultural user modeling with CUMO: An approach to overcome the personalization bootstrapping problem. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Cultural Heritage on the Semantic Web, International Semantic Web Conference.Google Scholar
- Reinecke, K., Schenkel, S., and Bernstein, A. 2010. Modeling a user's culture. In Handbook of Research on Culturally Aware Information Technology: Perspectives And Models. IGI Global.Google Scholar
- Rogers, P. and Tan, J. 2008. Fifty years of intercultural study: A continuum of perspectives for research and teaching. Tech. rep., Ross School of Business.Google Scholar
- Rose, K 2005. Aspekte der interkulturellen Systemgestaltunllj. In Proceedings of the Conference Mensch und Computer'05. Kunst und Wissenschaft, GrenzUberschreitungen der interaktiven Art.Google Scholar
- Schmid-Isler, S. 2000. The Language of Digital Genres—A Semiotic Investigation of Style and Iconology on the World Wide Web. System Sciences. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sears, A. and Shneiderman, B. 1994. Split menus: Effectively using selection frequency to organize menus. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 1, 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shneiderman, B. 2002. Promoting universal usability with multi-layer interface design. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Siala, H., O'Keefe, R., and Hone, K 2004. The Impact of religious affiliation on trust in the context of electronic commerce. Interact. Comput.Google Scholar
- Tractinsky, N. 1997. Aesthetics and apparent usability: Empirically Assessing cultural and methodological issues. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems (CHI'97). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tractinsky, N., Cokhavi, A., Kirschenbaum, M., and Sharfi, T. 2006. Evaluating the consistency of immediate aesthetic perceptions of web pages. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 64. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tractinsky, N., Shoval-Katz, A., and Ikar, D, 2000. What is beautiful is usable. Interact. Comput. 13, 2, 127--145.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Venkatesh, V. and Zhang, X. 2010. Culture and technology adoption: Theory and empirical test of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) in the U.S. vs. China. J. Glob. Inform. Techn. Manage. 13, 1, 5--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., and Davis, F. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 27, 3, 425--478. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Voehringer-Kuhnt, T. 2002. Kulturelle Einflusse auf die Gestaltung von Mensch-Maschine Systemen. GRIN Verlag.Google Scholar
- Yeo, A. 1996. World-Wide CHI: Cultural user interfaces, a silver lining in cultural diversity. SIGCHI Bull. 28, 3, 7. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zahed, F., Van Pelt, W., and Song, J, 2001. Crosscurrents: Cultural dimensions and global web user interface design. IEEE Profess. Comm. 44, 2, 83--103.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zhao, W., Massey, B., Murphy, J., and Lui, F. 2003. Cultural dimensions of web site design and content. Prometheus 21, 75--84.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Improving performance, perceived usability, and aesthetics with culturally adaptive user interfaces
Recommendations
Exploring the boundary conditions of the effect of aesthetics on perceived usability
A growing body of usability research suggests that the aesthetics of a system affects users' perceptions of the usability of that system. But the causal relationship between aesthetics and usability and the direction of that relation have not been ...
Is beautiful really usable? Toward understanding the relation between usability, aesthetics, and affect in HCI
This paper analyzes the relation between usability and aesthetics. In a laboratory study, 80 participants used one of four different versions of the same online shop, differing in interface-aesthetics (low vs. high) and interface-usability (low vs. high)...
Understanding user preferences based on usability and aesthetics before and after actual use
Designing a highly preferred product or system is a crucial issue for better information-services and product sales. We attempted to understand the process of users' preference-making based on usability and aesthetics. In the present study, we examined ...
Comments