User Experience Over Time - Modeling Users' Experiences with Interactive Systems - page 67

4.4.1.4 Process

One week before the purchase of the product, participants were introduced to the
study. During this week, participants were asked to capture their major expectations
about the product in the form of short narratives. The perceived importance of each
expectation was assessed, using a 7-point Likert scale, both before the purchase as
well as at the end of the study. After purchase, participants captured their daily ex-
periences at the end of each day. This process consisted of two main activities: day
reconstruction ,and experience narration . In day reconstruction, participants listed
all activities of the day that somehow related to their iPhone. A brief name and an
estimation of time spent were recorded for each activity. In experience narration,
participants were asked to pick the three most impactful , either satisfying or dissat-
isfying, experiences of that day. They were explicitly instructed to “use [their] own
feeling or a definition of what 'satisfying' and 'dissatisfying' experience means” .
For each of the three experiences, participants were asked to write a story that de-
scribes in detail the situation, their feelings and their momentary perceptions of the
product.

Fig. 4.4 Interface used for rating the product after reporting an experience

Finally, for each experience narration, participants rated the product as perceived
within that specific situation (see figure 4.4. A shortened version of the Attrakd-
iff 2 (Hassenzahl, 2004) questionnaire was employed, that identifies two overall
evaluative judgments, i.e. beauty and goodness , and three distinct product qualities:
pragmatics (i.e. utility and ease-of-use), stimulation (i.e. the product's ability to ad-
dress the human need of stimulation, novelty and challenge) and identification (i.e.
the product's ability to address the need of expressing one's self through objects one
owns). Each construct was measured with one single item (see table 4.2) that dis-
played the highest loading on the latent construct during a prior study (Karapanos
et al., 2008a). Pragmatic quality was split in two distinct components, usefulness and
ease-of-use. Identification was measured with a single item derived from Tractinsky
and Zmiri (2006).