The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces

Ece ÇINAR, (Endüstri Ürünleri Tasarımı Bölümü Mimarlık, Gebze Teknik Üniversitesi, Kocaeli, Türkiye)
Ekrem Cem ALPPAY (Mimarlık Fakültesi Endüstriyel Tasarım Bölümü, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye)
A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi
16 6
Yıl: 2023 Cilt: 20 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 199 - 217 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.58278/0.2023.2 İndeks Tarihi: 08-06-2023

The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces

Öz:
This paper aims to discover the role of usability on the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces in the kitchen context. VUX–Virtual User Experience; a system consisting of a hob, a hood and a dishwasher machine controlled by a projection-based user-interface, was chosen as the product. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model was chosen as the theoretical frame. A two-phase study was conducted with 30 participants based on the functional prototype. The first phase consisted of a structured user-test in a showroom kitchen environment in which participants were requested to complete pre-defined tasks. The second phase was a UTAUT questionnaire including 32 questions organized in 9 sections. Content analysis and statistical analysis were used to analyze qualitative and quantitative data from the UTAUT questionnaire. It has been found that although the projectionbased user-interface has a great role on technology acceptance based on usability, most of the users defined their behavioral intention to use VUX by their attitude toward using technology, experience, and anxiety in the kitchen context. In terms of user-interface design, it has been found that the design characteristics of the user-interface, such as form of icons, color and shape, did not have a significant effect on the technology acceptance of VUX. In terms of usability, errors and safety concerns were found to be the most effective factors in the acceptance of technology by determining the usability of the system.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abu-Al-Aish, A., & Love, S. (2013). Factors influencing students’ acceptance of m-learning: An investigation in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5). https://doi. org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i5.1631
  • Adnan, N., Md Nordin, S., bin Bahruddin, M. A., & Ali, M. (2018). How trust can drive forward the user acceptance to the technology? In-vehicle technology for autonomous vehicle. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 118. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.10.019
  • Arfi, W. Ben, Nasr, I. Ben, Kondrateva, G., & Hikkerova, L. (2021). The role of trust in intention to use the IoT in eHealth: Application of the modified UTAUT in a consumer context. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2021.120688
  • Bonanni, L., Lee, C., & Selcker, T. (2005). CounterIntelligence: Augmented reality kitchen. In Proc. CHI (Vol. 2239, p. 45).
  • Cao, X., Forlines, C., & Balakrishnan, R. (2007). Multi-user interaction using handheld projectors. In UIST: Proceedings of the Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. https://doi. org/10.1145/1294211.1294220
  • Carlsson, C., Carlsson, J., Hyvönen, K., Puhakainen, J., & Walden, P. (2006). Adoption of mobile devices/ services - Searching for answers with the UTAUT. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Vol. 6). https://doi. org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.38
  • Cavdar Aksoy, N., Kocak Alan, A., Tumer Kabadayi, E., & Aksoy, A. (2020). Individuals’ intention to use sports wearables: the moderating role of technophobia. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJSMS-08-2019-0083
  • Chang, C. C. (2020). Exploring the Usage Intentions of Wearable Medical Devices: A Demonstration Study. Interactive Journal of Medical Research, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.2196/19776
  • Chang, C. C. (2013). Library mobile applications in university libraries. Library Hi Tech, 31(3). https://doi. org/10.1108/LHT-03-2013-0024
  • Chen, S. Y., & MacRedie, R. D. (2005). The assessment of usability of electronic shopping: A heuristic evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 25(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2005.08.008
  • Chiu, C. M., & Wang, E. T. G. (2008). Understanding Web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information and Management, 45(3). https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.02.003
  • Connell, I., Blandford, A., & Green, T. (2004). CASSM and cognitive walkthrough: usability issues with ticket vending machines. Behaviour and Information Technology, 23(5), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/014492904100 01773463
  • Constantine, L. L., & Lockwood, L. D. (1999). Software for use: a practical guide to the models and methods of usage-centered design. SIGCHI Bulletin.
  • Çınar, E. (2019). An Exploration of UTAUT by Using Usability Evaluation Methods: A Case Study of VUX Kithcen Projection System. M.Sc. Thesis. Istanbul Technical University, İstanbul.
  • Dalsgaard, P., & Kim, H. (2011). 3D projection on physical objects: Design insights from five real life cases. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. https:// doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979097
  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3). https://doi. org/10.2307/249008
  • de Vet J.H.M. (1993). User-interface specification guidelines for consumer products, IPO Annual Progress Report Vol.28. In IPO Annual Progress Report Vol.28 (pp. 151–159). Institute for Perception Research.
  • Di Pietro, L., Guglielmetti Mugion, R., Mattia, G., Renzi, M. F., & Toni, M. (2015). The Integrated Model on Mobile Payment Acceptance (IMMPA): An empirical application to public transport. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 56. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2015.05.001
  • Dillon, A. and Morris, M. (1998). Can they to will they: extending usability evaluation to address acceptance’, in Hoadley, E.D. and Izak, B. (Eds.): Proceedings Association for Information Systems Conference, Baltimore, MD.
  • Eason, K. D. (1984). Towards the experimental study of usability. Behaviour and Information Technology, 3(2). https://doi. org/10.1080/01449298408901744
  • Ficocelli, M., & Nejat, G. (2012). The Design of an Interactive Assistive Kitchen System. Assistive Technology, 24(4), 246–258. doi:10.1080/10400435 .2012.659834
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Freudenthal, A., & Mook, H. J. (2003). The evaluation of an innovative intelligent thermostat interface: universal usability and age differences. Cognitive Technology Work, 5, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-002- 0115-6
  • Garavand, A., Samadbeik, M., Nadri, H., Rahimi, B., & Asadi, H. (2019). Effective Factors in Adoption of Mobile Health Applications between Medical Sciences Students Using the UTAUT Model. Methods of Information in Medicine, 58(4–5). https://doi. org/10.1055/s-0040-1701607
  • Gould, J. D., & Lewis, C. (1983). Designing for usability---key principles and what designers think. CHI 83 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 28(3), 50–53. https://doi. org/10.1145/800045.801579
  • Han, S. H., Hwan Yun, M., Kim, K. J., & Kwahk, J. (2000). Evaluation of product usability: Development and validation of usability dimensions and design elements based on empirical models. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26(4). https://doi. org/10.1016/S0169-8141(00)00019-6
  • Hennington, A., & Janz, B. D. (2007). Information Systems and Healthcare XVI: Physician Adoption of Electronic Medical Records: Applying the UTAUT Model in a Healthcare Context. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 19. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.01905
  • Hiraki, T., Fukushima, S., Kawahara, Y., & Naemura, T. (2019). NavigAtorch: Projection-based robot control interface using high-speed handheld projector. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2019 Emerging Technologies, SA 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3355049.3360538
  • Hornbæk, K. (2006). Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64(2), 79–102. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002
  • Huber, J. (2014). A Research Overview of Mobile Projected User Interfaces. Informatik-Spektrum, 37(5), 464–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00287-014-0819-z
  • International Standard Organisation. (2015). ISO/DIS 9241-11 Ergonomics of human-system interaction -- Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts. ISO 9241-11:2018(E).
  • Jordan, P. W. (1998a). An Introduction to Usability. Taylor & Francis.
  • Jordan, P. W. (1998b). Human factors for pleasure in product use. Applied Ergonomics, 29(1), 25–33.
  • Keinonen, T. (1988). One-dimensional Usability: Influence of Usability on Consumers’ Product Preference. Helsinki: University Of Art And Design.
  • Ko, J. C., Chan, L. W., & Hung, Y. P. (2010). Public issues on projected user interface. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. https://doi. org/10.1145/1753846.1753874
  • Liljegren, E. (2006). Usability in a medical technology context assessment of methods for usability evaluation of medical equipment. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36(4), 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon. 2005.10.004
  • Lin, B. S., Wong, A. M., & Tseng, K. C. (2016). Community-Based ECG Monitoring System for Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(4). https://doi. org/10.1007/s10916-016-0442-4
  • Lin, C. Y., & Lin, Y. Bin. (2013). Projection- based user interface for smart home environments. In Proceedings - International Computer Software and Applications Conference. https://doi. org/10.1109/COMPSACW.2013.117
  • Ma, Q., Chan, A. H. S., & Chen, K. (2016). Personal and other factors affecting acceptance of smartphone technology by older Chinese adults. Applied Ergonomics, 54. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.11.015
  • Madigan, R., Louw, T., Dziennus, M., Graindorge, T., Ortega, E., Graindorge, M., & Merat, N. (2016). Acceptance of Automated Road Transport Systems (ARTS): An Adaptation of the UTAUT Model. In Transportation Research Procedia (Vol. 14). https://doi. org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.237
  • Mahalil, I., Yusof, A. M., & Ibrahim, N. (2020). A literature review on the usage of Technology Acceptance Model for analysing a virtual reality’s cycling sport applications with enhanced realism fidelity. In 2020 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Multimedia, ICIMU 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/ ICIMU49871.2020.9243571
  • Mayer, P., Volland, D., Thiesse, F., & Fleisch, E. (2011). User Acceptance of ’ Smart Products ’: An Empirical Investigation. WI, Vol. 2(2011).
  • Mewes, A., Saalfeld, P., Riabikin, O., Skalej, M., & Hansen, C. (2016). A gesture-controlled projection display for CT-guided interventions. International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, 11(1). https://doi. org/10.1007/s11548-015-1215-0
  • Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. San Diego: Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Norman, D. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things: Revised & Expanded Edition. The Design of Everyday Things.
  • Okumus, B., Ali, F., Bilgihan, A., & Ozturk, A. B. (2018). Psychological factors influencing customers’ acceptance of smartphone diet apps when ordering food at restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijhm.2018.01.001
  • Oliveira, O.L., & Baranauskas, C. C. (2008). Semiotic Proposals for Software Design : Problems and Prospects.
  • Ooi, K. B., Foo, F. E., & Tan, G. W. H. (2018). Can mobile taxi redefine the transportation industry? A systematic literature review from the consumer perspective. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 16(3). https:// doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2018.091391
  • Orso, V., Nascimben, G., Gullà, F., Menghi, R., Ceccacci, S., Cavalieri, L., … Gamberini, L. (2017). Introducing wearables in the kitchen: An assessment of user acceptance in younger and older adults. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 10279 LNCS). https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-58700-4_47
  • Palau-Saumell, R., Forgas-Coll, S., Sánchez-García, J., & Robres, E. (2019). User acceptance of mobile apps for restaurants: An expanded and extended UTAUT-2. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10021210
  • Peng, S., Winkler, S., & Tedjokusumo, J. (2007). A tangible game interface using projector-camera systems. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 4551 LNCS).
  • Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Benyon D., Holland, S., & Casey, T. (1994). Human-Computer Interaction: Concepts And Design. Addison Wesley.
  • Rahman, M. M., Lesch, M. F., Horrey, W. J., & Strawderman, L. (2017). Assessing the utility of TAM, TPB, and UTAUT for advanced driver assistance systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. aap.2017.09.011
  • Roeber, H., Bacus, J., & Tomasi, C. (2003). Typing in thin air the Canesta projection Keyboard - A new method of interaction with electronic devices. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1145/765891.765944
  • Rubin, J., & Chrisnell, D. (2008). Handbook of Usability Testing, Second Edition : How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests. Medicina Interna de Mexico (Vol. 17).
  • Rümelin, S., & Butz, A. (2013). How to make large touch screens usable while driving. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI 2013. https:// doi.org/10.1145/2516540.2516557
  • Säde, S., Nieminen, M., & Riihiaho, S. (1998). Testing usability with 3D paper prototypes--Case Halton system. Applied Ergonomics, 29(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003- 6870(97)00027-6
  • Seffah, A., Donyaee, M., Kline, R. B., & Padda, H. K. (2006). Usability measurement and metrics: A consolidated model. Software Quality Journal, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-006- 7600-8
  • Seol, S. H., Ko, D. S., & Yeo, I. S. (2017). Ux analysis based on TR and UTAUT of sports smart wearable devices. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 11(8). https:// doi.org/10.3837/tiis.2017.08.024
  • Shackel, B. (1991). Usability context, framework, definition, design and evaluation. In S. Shackel, B. ; Richardson (Ed.), Human factors for informatics usability. Cambridge University Press.
  • Singh, M., & Mittal, A. (2020). Measuring User Intention for Continued Usage of Internet of Medical Devices— A Proposed Framework. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, 17(6). https://doi.org/10.1166/ jctn.2020.8918
  • Song, P., Winkler, S., Gilani, S. O., & Zhou, Z. Y. (2007). Vision-based projected tabletop interface for finger interactions. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 4796 LNCS). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 540-75773-3_6
  • Teo, T. (2011). Technology Acceptance Research in Education. In Technology Acceptance in Education. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-487-4_1
  • Tunnell IV, H. D. (2013). A pilot study about military users and information systems: Exploring military user attitudes about technology. In Proceedings - SocialCom/PASSAT/BigData/ EconCom/BioMedCom 2013. https:// doi.org/10.1109/SocialCom.2013.136
  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3). https://doi. org/10.2307/30036540
  • Wang, H.-I. (2005). The Role of Personality Traits in https://doi. org/10.7903/cmr.73 UTAUT Model under Online Stocking. Contemporary Management Research, 1(1).
  • Wiklund, M. E., Kendler, J., & Yale, A. S. (2010). Usability testing of medical devices. Usability Testing of Medical Devices. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10458
  • Wong, K., Russo, S., & Mcdowall, J. (2012). Understanding early childhood student teachers’ acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 30(1). https://doi. org/10.1108/10650741311288788
  • Wu, Y. L., Tao, Y. H., & Yang, P. C. (2007). Using UTAUT to explore the behavior of 3G mobile communication users. In IEEM 2007: 2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/ IEEM.2007.4419179
  • Ye, J., Zheng, J., & Yi, F. (2020). A study on users’ willingness to accept mobility as a service based on UTAUT model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 157. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120066
  • URL-1<http : //www.concept - kitchens2025.com/>, date retrieved 25.09.2019.
  • URL-2<https://www.sonymobile. com/global-en/products/smart-products/ xperia-touch/>, date retrieved 25.09.2019.
APA ÇINAR E, ALPPAY E (2023). The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. , 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
Chicago ÇINAR Ece,ALPPAY Ekrem Cem The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. (2023): 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
MLA ÇINAR Ece,ALPPAY Ekrem Cem The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. , 2023, ss.199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
AMA ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. . 2023; 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
Vancouver ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. . 2023; 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
IEEE ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E "The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces." , ss.199 - 217, 2023. 10.58278/0.2023.2
ISNAD ÇINAR, Ece - ALPPAY, Ekrem Cem. "The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces". (2023), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.58278/0.2023.2
APA ÇINAR E, ALPPAY E (2023). The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
Chicago ÇINAR Ece,ALPPAY Ekrem Cem The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 20, no.1 (2023): 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
MLA ÇINAR Ece,ALPPAY Ekrem Cem The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, vol.20, no.1, 2023, ss.199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
AMA ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi. 2023; 20(1): 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
Vancouver ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi. 2023; 20(1): 199 - 217. 10.58278/0.2023.2
IEEE ÇINAR E,ALPPAY E "The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces." A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, ss.199 - 217, 2023. 10.58278/0.2023.2
ISNAD ÇINAR, Ece - ALPPAY, Ekrem Cem. "The role of usability in the technology acceptance of projection-based user-interfaces". A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 20/1 (2023), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.58278/0.2023.2
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
24-04-2024 7:50

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları