studies that clarify how they differ from established constructs. Otherwise we risk ending up with an endless number of words that describe similar phenomena within UX, something from which the characterization of user satisfaction in usability research has suffered.

Most researchers agree that UX is multidimensional. Therefore we looked at how many dimensions researchers study in their work. Surprisingly, almost half of the studies assessed only one dimension; 71 percent of the studies assessed two or fewer dimensions. Thus, UX—despite being thought of as a multifaceted and complex construct—is often approached in quite restricted ways.

 

Questionnaires

Interviews (semi-structured) Video recordings

User observation (live)

Focus groups

Interviews (open)

Diaries

Probes

Photographs

Collage or drawing

Psychophysiological measures

Body movement

Other methods

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

• Figure 2 (top). Dimensions collected in UX research. Figure 3 (bottom). Data-collection methods in UX research.

enchantment a crucial and distinct
component of UX? What is the dif-
ference between enchantment and
established concepts such as, for
instance, the experience of flow? Is
flow a condition or a consequence
of enchantment? No studies in our
sample report how enchantment
can be measured and consequently
help clarify its role within UX
and the difference between it and
other concepts. We do not think
that enchantment is any more
or any less problematic than the
other dimensions being proposed.
However, if new dimensions are
needed and proposed, they should
at some stage be accompanied by

How Do We Study UX?

The methods applied in UX research are often debated, in particular those concerning the suitability of qualitative and quantitative approaches. A key issue is whether UX may be measured and modeled, and if so, how. Therefore we looked at the methods currently applied by UX researchers. Half of the studies are qualitative ( 50 percent), whereas 33 percent use quantitative methods and 17 percent combine the approaches. These figures differ considerably from traditional HCI, where one estimate suggests that 14 percent of the studies are qualitative, whereas about 65 percent are quantitative [ 4]. The shift toward UX seems to be accompanied by a change in methodology.

Another important question is how UX data is collected (see Figure 3). We found that questionnaires are the dominant UX-assessment method ( 53 percent). Others apply qualitative methods from HCI that involve talking directly with users, using semi-structured interviews ( 20 percent), focus groups ( 15