User Experience Over Time - Modeling Users' Experiences with Interactive Systems - page 75

4.4.3.3 How Does Each Phase Contribute to the Overall Perceived Quality

of the Product?

Hassenzahl (2004) distinguished between two overall evaluative judgments of the
quality of interactive products, namely judgments of Goodness and of Beauty. While
prior work suggests goodness to be a goal-oriented evaluation, relating to the prag-
matic quality of the product (usefulness and ease-of-use), and beauty a pleasure-
oriented evaluation, relating to hedonic quality (stimulation and identification) (Has-
senzahl, 2004; Tractinsky and Zmiri, 2006; Mahlke, 2006; Van Schaik and Ling,
2008), we saw something different. In each phase, different qualities of the product
were crucial for its gradual acceptance.
Tables 4.4 and 4.5 display regression analyses with usefulness, ease-of-use, stim-
ulation and identification as predictors and Goodness or Beauty as predicted vari-
ables. Each variable is measured through a single item. Each case depicts users'
ratings within a single experience. Cases were categorized in three groups based on
whether an individual experience was classified as relating to the orientation, the
incorporation, or the identification phase.
While during Orientation the Goodness of the product was primarily derived
on the basis of its ease-of-use (Regression analysis: β =0.43, t=4.79, p < .001) and

stimulation ( β =0.43, t=4.79, p < .001), in Incorporation , the product's usefulness

( .001) became the primary predictor of Goodness, and in the

phase of Identification the qualities of identification (

β =0.49, t=10.84, p <

β =0.53, t=3.57, p < .01) and

ease-of-use ( .01) became the most dominant qualities impacting

the overall goodness of the product.

β =0.44, t=2.96, p <

Ta b l e 4 . 4 Multiple Regression analysis with usefulness, ease-of-use, stimulation and iden-
tification as predictors and Goodness as predicted (β values and significances * p < .05, **
p < .001) for both satisfying and dissatisfying experiences.

Orientation Incorporation Identification

Usefulness .49**

Ease-of-use .43** .19** .44**

Stimulation .43** .22**

Identification .14** .53**

Adjusted R 2 .63 .79 .51

As expected, Beauty appeared to be highly related to the quality of identifica-
tion, i.e. the social meanings that the product communicates about its owner (Orien-
tation:

< <

β =0.51, t=4.32, p .001, Incorporation: β =0.47, t=8.17, p .001, Identifica-

<

tion: β =0.78, t=5.73, p .001), and stimulation (Orientation: β =0.22, t=1.89, p=.06,

<

Incorporation: .001).

Next, we found a priori expectations to have surprisingly limited impact on the
actual experience with the product. Based on earlier research, one would expect
a priori expectations to have a major role in forming overall evaluative judgments

β =0.27, t=4.69, p