Daniel Ullrich
Technische Universität Darmstadt
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Daniel Ullrich.
Interacting with Computers | 2007
Marc Hassenzahl; Daniel Ullrich
Recently, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) started to focus on experiential aspects of product use, such as affect or hedonic qualities. One interesting question concerns the way a particular experience is summarized into a retrospective value judgment about the product. In the present study, we specifically explored the relationship between affect, mental effort and spontaneity experienced while interacting with a storytelling system and retrospective judgments of appeal. In addition, we studied differential effects of the presence or absence of instrumental goals. In general, active instrumental goals did not only impact experience per se by, for example, inducing mental effort, but also the way subsequent retrospective judgments were formed. We discuss the implications of our findings for the practice of product evaluation in HCI specifically, and more general aspects, such as the role of affect in product evaluations and the importance of usage mode compatibility (i.e., a compatibility of the way one ought to and actually does approach a product).
Archive | 2014
Kristian Schatz; Josef Schlittenlacher; Daniel Ullrich; Uwe Rüppel; Wolfgang Ellermeier
Applying a performance-based approach to fire protection design emphasizes the safe performance of a building as a whole rather than meeting detailed code requirements. To this effect, fire safety engineers make use of computer models and simulations to describe the expected spread of fire and smoke, and the safety evacuation. Since the protection of human life is the primary aim of the performance-based approach, predicting the behavior of people in danger is an essential purpose of such modeling. Particularly, the relevant human factors (individual decisions and parameters to describe human behavior) have to be taken into account. There is some controversy in the Fire Safety Engineering community on how to model human behavior, because appropriate methods for data collection and validation are not available. The aim of the present research is thus to achieve a better understanding of what actually happens during an extreme situation and how people come to decisions by using a serious gaming approach. The research hypothesis to be examined is: Can human evacuation behavior be explored using a computer game?
international conference on optoelectronics and microelectronics | 2013
Daniel Ullrich
Zusammenfassung “Intuitive Interaktion” gilt im Bereich technischer Produkte als unumstrittene Maxime. Was genau jedoch die wahrgenommene Intuitivität eines Produkts ausmacht, ist weniger klar definiert. Ich habe mich dem Phänomen intuitive Interaktion anhand eines dualen Ansatzes genähert, der Forschungserkenntnisse aus dem Bereich intuitiver Entscheidungen sowie Einsichten aus Nutzerstudien im Bereich interaktive Technologien kombiniert. Der vorliegende Beitrag stellt ein integratives Modell vor, das die zentralen Forschungsergebnisse zusammenfasst. Kern des Modells ist die wahrgenommene Intuitivität eines Produkts und vier hierfür relevante Komponenten (Mühelosigkeit, Gefühlsgeleitet, Verbalisierungsfähigkeit, Magisches Erleben). Diese sind umgeben von mehreren Einflussfaktoren, die im Kontext der intuitiven Interaktion wirken und sie vielfältig moderieren. Einflussfaktoren erster Ebene sind der Nutzer und dessen individueller Erfahrungshintergrund, das Produkt mit seinen Eigenschaften und der Kontext, in dem die Interaktion stattfindet. Einflussfaktoren zweiter Ebene sind die Urteilsintegration (die Urteilsbildung des Nutzers), der Nutzungsmodus und die Transferdistanz (Distanz zwischen Anwendungsdomäne und Ursprung des Vorwissens). Die genannten Faktoren werden anhand beispielhafter Studienergebnisse beschrieben. Abschließend werden Ansatzpunkte des Modells für die User Experience Forschung und Gestaltung diskutiert.
international conference on optoelectronics and microelectronics | 2017
Daniel Ullrich
Abstract With the development of social robots that are primarily designed for interacting with humans, particular facets of interaction need to be explored. One of them is the manifestation of robot personalities, which have the potential to raise acceptance and enhance user experience if done appropriate – or ruin both if done wrong. The present paper argues for the relevance of suitable robot personalities and discusses the factors that affect suitability, in particular interaction domain and personal preferences. An experiment ( N = 30
international conference on optoelectronics and microelectronics | 2016
Sarah Diefenbach; Andreas Kapsner; Matthias Laschke; Jasmin Niess; Daniel Ullrich
\mathrm{N}=30
Usability Professionals | 2016
Stefan Tretter; Sarah Diefenbach; Daniel Ullrich; Nina Kolb
) with four different interaction scenarios (goal- and experience oriented) and three robot personalities (positive, neutral, negative) was performed to explore effects of personality and domain on personality suitability and acceptance. Results indicate that users can differentiate between different robot personalities and evaluate accordingly. In a goal-oriented stressful situation (train-ticket purchase under time pressure) the neutral personality was rated best. In experience-oriented scenarios, the positive robot personality was preferred. In the context of strictly performance oriented tasks, the effect of robot personality seems to be insignificant. Personal preferences for personalities seem to be influential, however, no clear pattern could be found. Lastly, directions for future research are depicted and implications for researchers and designers are discussed.
international conference on optoelectronics and microelectronics | 2014
Nina Kolb; Sarah Diefenbach; Daniel Ullrich
The multitude of technologies in our daily life – smartphones, ticket machines, and communication services like WhatsApp or social media platforms like Facebook – naturally shapes our actions and thinking. Beyond this, technology also becomes a medium for actively influencing and changing human behavior. Often, the intended change in behavior aims at socially desirable goals, such as conscious, sustainable consumption, public safety, or the adoption of healthier lifestyles. Examples are speed monitoring displays, smart meters to control energy consumption, or mobile apps that remind their users of doing more sports. Also healthcare providers make use of such solutions and started to equip their customers with “smart technology”, tracking their actions and daily routines. A healthy lifestyle is rewarded with a fee reduction, or, in other words, not using such technology is punished with paying more. Apparently, such products have high potential to better our lives, but they also raise serious ethical concerns: Should we consider the induced changes in behavior as manipulation? And if so, in which cases might such manipulation be justified? Does the design of these products show enough respect for the autonomy, dignity and privacy of the users? The discussion of such normative issues has not yet reached any definitive conclusions. In general, we are a dealing with a relatively young product category that obviously asks for new models, metrics and quality criteria. While users and designers are confronted with such technologies in their daily life and working environment, many established criteria of “positive user experience” (e. g., efficiency, comfort) are not applicable anymore. Instead of making life easy and smooth, technologies for behavior change often deliberately create friction. The idea of an aesthetic of friction [3] is to break up routines to inspire reflection. For example, Keymoment [4] makes the choice between taking the car or the bike more deliberate. If the user takes the car key, Keymoment throws the bike key at the users’ feet. You can pick it up, hang it back and still take the car – or reflect on what might be good for your health and the environment. However, aesthetic of friction is only one possible design principle. It might not be suited for all contexts of behavior change and especially long term effects still require further exploration. Our goal is to develop, ideally in an interdisciplinary effort, more general standards, design guidelines and quality criteria that help us to describe, design and evaluate such products, also considering ethical perspectives. As a start to this endeavor, the present article points out some central questions about the potential, current challenges and ethical issues in the field of technology for behavior change. The following sections are based on a discussion between experts with backgrounds in psychology, design, media informatics and philosophy. Sarah Diefenbach, whose background is in psychology, led the discussion. Her current research centers around technology design as a chance to support self-improvement and well-being but also the critical side effects and ‘unhealthy routines’ initiated through technology and social media. Andreas Kapsner is a philosopher whose main focus has been the question in how far governments should make use of such technologies and techniques. The idea that this potential to lead citizens towards “health, wealth and happiness” should be vigorously exploited has been popularized by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein in their best-selling book “Nudge”. Matthias Laschke, whose background is design and human-computer-interaction, focuses on interactive objects that help people to change their *Corresponding author: Sarah Diefenbach, Ludwig-MaximiliansUniversity Munich, Munich, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] Andreas Kapsner, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] Matthias Laschke, Folkwang University of the Arts, Essen, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] Jasmin Niess, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] Daniel Ullrich, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany, e-mail: [email protected]
international conference on optoelectronics and microelectronics | 2011
Daniel Ullrich; Sarah Diefenbach
Seit über zehn Jahren bietet die German UPA (Berufsverband für UX und Usability, www.germanupa.de) mit dem Branchenreport einen regelmäßigen Überblick der Situation von User Experience (UX) und Usability Professionals in Deutschland. 2016 haben sich 372 Personen an der Befragung beteiligt und liefern damit eine umfangreiche Informationsbasis zu Ausund Weiterbildung, Arbeitsfeldern und Aufgabenbereichen, Verdienstmöglichkeiten, aktuellen Trends und Herausforderungen sowie den bekanntesten Unternehmen. Neben Zahlen und Fakten liefern zusätzlich subjektive Einschätzungen eine umfassende Beschreibung der Situation von Angestellten und Selbstständigen und vermitteln ein Stimmungsbild der Branche. Hinzu kommen ausgewählte, längsschnittliche Vergleiche, um die derzeitige Situation einzuordnen und bisherige Entwicklungen aufzuzeigen.
nordic conference on human-computer interaction | 2010
Daniel Ullrich; Sarah Diefenbach
Zusammenfassung Gute Usability und User Experience sind mittlerweile allgemein anerkannte Qualitätskriterien, werden vom Nutzer aber auch eingefordert und erwartet. Hier beginnt der Job der Usability und User Experience (UX) Professionals. Mit dem jährlich erscheinenden Branchenreport Usability gibt die German UPA (Berufsverband der deutschen Usability und User Experience Professionals, www.germanupa.de) einen Eindruck in das Berufsbild von Usability und User Experience Professionals und berichtet über Entwicklungen, aktuelle Themen sowie die bekanntesten Unternehmen der Branche. Auf Basis des Branchenreports 2013 und der Angaben von 356 Teilnehmern berichtet der vorliegende Beitrag zentrale Kennzahlen und Entwicklungen der Branche. Neben Informationen zu Ausbildungswegen, dem Arbeitsfeld Usability/UX sowie aktuellen Diskussionen der Branche greift der Beitrag einige Schwerpunktthemen auf wie beispielsweise eine genauere Betrachtung der Arbeitssituationen hinter einzelnen Jobbezeichnungen (z. B. Usability Engineer, UX Consultant), eine Beleuchtung der speziellen Arbeitssituation und typischen Werdegängen der Freiberufler sowie die Abgrenzung der Begriffe User Experience und Usability.
Mensch & Computer | 2010
Daniel Ullrich; Sarah Diefenbach
Zusammenfassung Ein „intuitives Bedienkonzept” gilt als ein unabdingbares Qualitätsmerkmal interaktiver Produkte. Doch was genau Anwender sich hiervon versprechen, und welche Merkmale „intuitive” Nutzungserlebnisse aufweisen, ist weniger eindeutig. Der vorliegende Beitrag stellt einen Ansatz vor, der sich dem Erlebnis intuitive Interaktion aus phänomenologischer Sichtweise nähert. Neben Schilderungen aus Nutzersicht wurden Erkenntnisse der Intuitionsforschung aus der Entscheidungspsychologie berücksichtigt. Die hierbei identifizierten vier Komponenten intuitiver Interaktion (Mühelosigkeit, Gefühlsgeleitet, Verbalisierungsfähigkeit, Magisches Erleben) bildeten die Grundlage für die Entwicklung des INTUI-Fragebogens, mit dessen Hilfe sich verschiedene Pattern des Erlebens intuitiver Interaktion abbilden lassen. Der vorliegende Beitrag gibt einen Überblick über bisherige Studienergebnisse zu Einflussfaktoren auf INTUI-Pattern und die Entstehung von Intuitivitätsurteilen sowie einen Ausblick auf zukünftige Forschungsfragen.