3,909 research outputs found

    ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์Œ์„ฑ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ฒฝํ—˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ค‘์‹ฌ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ: ์ง€๋Šฅํ˜• ๊ฐœ์ธ ๋น„์„œ๋ฅผ ์ค‘์‹ฌ์œผ๋กœ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์ธ๋ฌธ๋Œ€ํ•™ ํ˜‘๋™๊ณผ์ • ์ธ์ง€๊ณผํ•™์ „๊ณต, 2021. 2. ์œค๋ช…ํ™˜.In recent years, research on Voice User Interfaces (VUIs) has been actively conducted. The VUI has many advantages which can be very useful for the general public as well as for elderly people and people with disabilities. The VUI is considered very suitable for individuals with disabilities to promote universal access to information, decreasing the gap between users with non-disabilities and users with disabilities. In this respect, many researchers have been trying to apply the VUI to various areas for people with disabilities to increase their independence and quality of life. However, previous studies related to VUIs for people with disabilities usually focused on developments and evaluations of new systems, and empirical studies are limited. There have been a few studies related to User Experience (UX) of VUIs for people with disabilities. This situation is not different with studies related to Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) which one of the most wildly being used VUIs nowadays. Although IPAs have potential to be practically used for users with disabilities because they can perform various tasks than simple VUIs, research related to UX of IPAs for them has been paid little attention to, only focusing on a young adult and middle-aged group among people with non-disabilities as end-users. Many previous studies referred to that IPAs would be helpful to people with disabilities. However, only a few studies related to IPAs have been conducted from the angle of users with disabilities, especially in terms of UX. It is known for that investigating usability and UX for users with disabilities is more difficult and delicate than that of users with non-disabilities. It can be said that research on UX of IPAs for users with disabilities should be conducted more closely to understand their interactions with IPAs. The purpose of the research in this dissertation is to investigate UX of VUIs for users with disabilities, focusing on IPAs. The research in this dissertation consists of three independent main studies. Study 1 investigates UX of commercially available VUIs for users with disabilities, by examining acceptance, focusing on the differences between users with different types of disabilities and identifying the reasons why they use or not use VUIs. A questionnaire survey was conducted for users with disabilities having used one or more VUIs. The collected data were analyzed statistically and qualitatively. The results of this study show acceptance of VUIs and the relationships between the acceptance factors for users with disabilities, with some differences between users with different types of disabilities. The results of this study also provide some insights related to UX of VUIs for users with disabilities from their perspective, showing that the acceptance factors can be used as criteria in comprehending the issues. Study 2 investigates UX of IPAs based on online reviews written by users through semantic network analysis. Before investigating UX of IPAs for users with disabilities, important factors for UX of IPAs were proposed by investigating UX of IPAs for users with non-disabilities in this study. As a case study, online reviews on smart speakers from the internet were collected. Then, the collected text data were preprocessed and structured in which words having similar meaning were clustered into one representative keyword. After this, the frequency of the keywords was calculated, and keywords in top 50 frequency were used for the analysis, because they were considered core keywords. Based on the keywords, a network was visualized, and centrality was measured. The results of this study show that most of the users were satisfied with the use of IPAs, although they felt that the performance of them was not completely reliable. In addition, the results of this study show aesthetic aspects of IPAs are also important for usersโ€™ enjoyment, especially for the satisfaction of users. This study proposes eleven important factors to be considered for UX of IPAs and among them, suggests ten factors to be considered in the design of IPAs to improve UX of IPAs and to satisfy users. Study 3 investigates UX of IPAs for users with disabilities and identifies how the use of IPAs affects quality of life of them, based on Study 1 and Study 2. In this study, comparisons with users with non-disabilities are also conducted. A questionnaire survey and a written interview were conducted for users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities having used one or more smart speakers. The collected data were analyzed statistically and qualitatively. The results of this study show that, regardless of disability, most users are sharing the main UX of IPAs and can benefit the use of IPA. The results of this study also show that the investigation on qualitative data is essential to the study for users with disabilities, offering various insights related to UX of IPAs from the angle of them and clear differences in UX of IPAs between users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities. This study proposes important factors for UX of IPAs for users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities based on the discussed factors for UX of IPAs in Study 2. This study also discusses various design implications for UX of IPAs and provides three important design implications which should be considered to improve UX, focusing on the interaction design of IPAs for not only users with disabilities but also all potential users. Each study provides design implications. Study 1 discusses design implications for UX of VUIs for users with disabilities. Study 2 suggests design implications for UX of IPAs, focusing on users with non-disabilities. Study 3 discusses various design implications for UX of IPAs and proposes three specific implications focusing on the interaction design of IPAs for all potential users. It is possible to expect that reflecting the implications in the interaction design of IPA will be helpful to all potential users, not just users with disabilities.์ตœ๊ทผ์— ๋“ค์–ด์™€ ์Œ์„ฑ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋“ค(Voice User Interfaces, VUIs)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ํ™œ๋ฐœํžˆ ์ง„ํ–‰๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. VUI๋Š” ์ผ๋ฐ˜์ ์ธ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์€ ๋ฌผ๋ก , ๊ณ ๋ น์ž ๋ฐ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ๋„ ๋งค์šฐ ์œ ์šฉํ•œ ๋งŽ์€ ์žฅ์ ๋“ค์„ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. VUI๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋ณดํŽธ์  ์ •๋ณด ์ ‘๊ทผ์„ ์šฉ์ดํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ๊ฐ„ ์กด์žฌํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ •๋ณด ๊ฒฉ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ์ค„์ด๋Š” ๋งค์šฐ ์œ ์šฉํ•œ ์—ญํ• ์„ ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๊ด€์ ์—์„œ, ๋งŽ์€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ž๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์˜ ๋…๋ฆฝ์„ฑ๊ณผ ์‚ถ์˜ ์งˆ์„ ๋†’์ด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด VUI๋ฅผ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์˜์—ญ์— ์ ์šฉํ•˜๋ ค๊ณ  ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์€ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„ ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์˜ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ๋ฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์  ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ œํ•œ์ ์ด๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค ์ค‘ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๊ฒฝํ—˜(User Experience, UX)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ƒ๋‹นํžˆ ๋“œ๋ฌผ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ƒํ™ฉ์€ ์˜ค๋Š˜๋‚  ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๋Š” VUIs ์ค‘ ํ•˜๋‚˜์ธ ์ง€๋Šฅํ˜• ๊ฐœ์ธ ๋น„์„œ๋“ค(Intelligent Personal Assistants, IPAs)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋„ ๋งˆ์ฐฌ๊ฐ€์ง€์ด๋‹ค. IPAs๋Š” ๋‹จ์ˆœํ•œ VUIs๋ณด๋‹ค ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ž‘์—…์„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋งค์šฐ ์‹ค์šฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ, IPAs์˜ UX ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๊ฑฐ์˜ ์ฃผ๋ชฉ๋ฐ›์ง€ ๋ชป ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์ค‘ ์ฒญ๋…„ ๋ฐ ์ค‘๋…„์ธต๋งŒ์ด ์ตœ์ข… ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋กœ ๊ณ ๋ ค๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์ „์˜ ๋งŽ์€ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์€ IPAs๊ฐ€ ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ํฐ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๊ณ  ์ž…์„ ๋ชจ์•„ ๋งํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ์‹ค์žฌ๋กœ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ ์ง„ํ–‰๋œ IPAs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋ณ„๋กœ ์—†์œผ๋ฉฐ IPAs์˜ UX ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋”์šฑ ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ์ƒํ™ฉ์ด๋‹ค. ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„๊ตํ–ˆ์„ ๋•Œ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ(usability) ๋ฐ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ๋ณต์žกํ•˜๊ณ  ์–ด๋ ค์šด ์ผ์ด๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ ‡๊ธฐ์— ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ๋ณด๋‹ค ์ฒ ์ €ํžˆ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ ธ์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค๊ณ  ๋ณผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ์„ ๋‘๊ณ , ๋ณธ ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชฉ์ ์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ IPAs์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ์€ ํฌ๊ฒŒ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋…๋ฆฝ์ ์ธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1์—์„œ๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์žฅ์• ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ฐจ์ด๋“ค๊ณผ ๊ทธ๋“ค์ด VUIs์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š๋Š” ์ด์œ ๋ฅผ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ , ์ƒ์šฉํ™”๋œ VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ํ•˜๋‚˜์ด์ƒ์˜ VUIs๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•œ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์ง‘๋œ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋Š” ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ •์„ฑ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์žฅ์• ์œ ํ˜•์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ VUIs์˜ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„(acceptance)์™€ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„ ์š”์ธ๋“ค ๊ฐ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„์— ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์ด VUIs์˜ UX ์ด์Šˆ๋“ค์„ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์คŒ๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ธ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋“ค(insights)์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•ด์ค€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ๋Š” ์˜๋ฏธ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง(semantic network) ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๊ฐ€ ์ž‘์„ฑํ•œ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋‹น ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ์ „์— ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์—ฌ IPAs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จํ•˜์—ฌ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์‚ฌ๋ก€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ, ์ธํ„ฐ๋„ท์—์„œ ์Šค๋งˆํŠธ ์Šคํ”ผ์ปค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐ๋“ค์„ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ํ›„, ํ…์ŠคํŠธ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์ „์ฒ˜๋ฆฌ ๋ฐ ๊ตฌ์กฐํ™”์˜€๊ณ , ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์œ ์‚ฌํ•œ ์˜๋ฏธ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ–๋Š” ๋‹จ์–ด๋“ค์ด ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ํ•˜๋‚˜์˜ ๋Œ€ํ‘œ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋กœ ๋ณ€ํ™˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์„ ๊ฑฐ์นœ ํ›„, ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ•˜์—ฌ, ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜ ์ƒ์œ„ 50๊ฐœ์˜ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์ด ํ•ต์‹ฌ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค๋กœ ๋ณด์˜€๊ธฐ์—, ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜ ์ƒ์œ„ 50๊ฐœ์˜ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์„ ๋ถ„์„์— ์‚ฌ์šฉํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ๋„คํŠธ์›Œํฌ๋ฅผ ์‹œ๊ฐํ™” ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ  ์ค‘์‹ฌ์„ฑ(centrality)์„ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ๋น„๋ก IPAs์˜ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ ์™„์ „ํžˆ ์‹ ๋ขฐํ•˜์ง€๋Š” ๋ชป ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋”๋ผ๋„ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด IPAs ์‚ฌ์šฉ์— ๋งŒ์กฑํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ IPAs์˜ ์‹ฌ๋ฏธ์  ์ธก๋ฉด๋“ค์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ฆ๊ฑฐ์›€๊ณผ ๋งŒ์กฑ์— ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ์—ด ํ•œ ๊ฐœ์˜ ์ค‘์š” ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ทธ ์ค‘์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋งŒ์กฑ์‹œํ‚ค๊ณ  IPAs์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ์‹œ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ํ•„์š”๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์—ด ๊ฐœ์˜ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์‹œ์‚ฌํ•ด์ค€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 3์—์„œ๋Š”, ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1๊ณผ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ IPAs์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ณ  IPAs์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ด ๊ทธ๋“ค์˜ ์‚ถ์˜ ์งˆ(quality of life)์— ์–ด๋– ํ•œ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์ฃผ๋Š”์ง€์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„๊ต ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์กŒ๋‹ค. ํ•˜๋‚˜์ด์ƒ์˜ IPAs๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ์™€ ์„œ๋ฉด ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์ง‘๋œ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋Š” ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ •์„ฑ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€, ์žฅ์•  ์œ ๋ฌด์™€ ์ƒ๊ด€์—†์ด, ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด ์ฃผ์š” IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ IPAs ์‚ฌ์šฉ์— ํ˜œํƒ์„ ๋ˆ„๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ IPAs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ธ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋“ค๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๋‘ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๊ฐ„ ๋ช…ํ™•ํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์คŒ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์ด๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ์ •์„ฑ์  ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋ถ„์„์ด ํ•„์ˆ˜์ ์ด๋ผ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์‹ค์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š”, ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ ๋…ผ์˜๋œ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX์— ์žˆ์–ด ์ค‘์š” ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” IPA์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค(implications)์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•˜๊ณ , ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๋ชจ๋“  ์ž ์žฌ์  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•œ IPA์˜ ์ƒํ˜ธ ์ž‘์šฉ ์„ค๊ณ„์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘” ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ธ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1์—์„œ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ๋Š” ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ์‹œํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 3์—์„œ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋“ค๋งŒ์ด ์•„๋‹Œ ๋ชจ๋“  ์ž ์žฌ์  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•˜๊ณ  IPA์˜ ์ƒํ˜ธ ์ž‘์šฉ ์„ค๊ณ„์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘” ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ธ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ IPAs์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ์— ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ์ž ์žฌ์ ์ธ ๋ชจ๋“  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค.ABSTRACT I CONTENTS V LIST OF TABLES VIII LIST OF FIGURES X CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Research Background 1 1.2. Research Objective 4 1.3. Outline of this Dissertation 7 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1. People with Disabilities and Research Methods for Them 10 2.1.1. People with Disabilities 10 2.1.2. Research Methods for People with Disabilities 11 2.2. Conceptual Frameworks 13 2.2.1. User Experience of Voice User Interfaces 13 2.2.2. Design Approaches for Accessibility 18 2.3. Related Work 22 2.3.1. Previous Studies Related to Voice User Interfaces 22 2.3.2. Previous Studies Related to Intelligent Personal Assistants 25 CHAPTER 3 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF VOICE USER INTERFACES FOR USERS WITH DISABILITIES BY EXAMINING ACCEPTANCE 31 3.1. Introduction 31 3.2. Method 35 3.2.1. Participants 35 3.2.2. Procedure 35 3.2.3. Questionnaire 36 3.2.4. Analysis 38 3.2.4.1. Statistical Analysis 38 3.2.4.1. Qualitative Analysis 38 3.3. Results 38 3.3.1. Reliability Analysis and Validity Analysis 38 3.3.2. Descriptive Analysis and Independent Two-Sample T-Test 39 3.3.3. Multiple Regression Analysis 39 3.3.4. Analysis on Comments of the Participants 44 3.4. Discussion 45 3.4.1. User Experience of Voice User Interfaces for Users with Disabilities 45 3.4.2. Reasons of Users with Disabilities for Using Voice User Interfaces or not 48 3.4.3. Design Implications on Voice User Interfaces for Users with Disabilities 50 3.5. Conclusion 51 CHAPTER 4 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF INTELLIGENT PERSONAL ASSISTANTS FROM ONLINE REVIEWS BY IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT FACTORS 54 4.1. Introduction 54 4.2. Method 56 4.2.1. Data Collection 56 4.2.2. Preprocessing and Structuring Data 57 4.2.3. Analysis 57 4.3. Results 60 4.3.1. Analysis on Frequency of the Keywords and Categorizing the Keywords 61 4.3.2. Visualization of the Network 61 4.3.3. Analysis on Centrality of the Keywords 65 4.4. Discussion 65 4.4.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants through Semantic Network Analysis from Online Reviews 65 4.4.2. Important Factors for User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants and Design Implications 70 4.5. Conclusion 74 CHAPTER 5 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF INTELLIGENT PERSONAL ASSISTANTS AND EFFECTS ON QUALITY OF LIFE FOR USERS WITH DISABILITIES BY COMPARING WITH USERS WITH NON-DISABILITIES 76 5.1. Introduction 76 5.2. Method 78 5.2.1. Participants 78 5.2.2. Procedure 79 5.2.3. Questionnaire 79 5.2.4. Written Interview 81 5.2.5. Analysis 84 5.2.5.1. Statistical Analysis 84 5.2.5.2. Qualitative Analysis 84 5.3. Results 85 5.3.1. Reliability Analysis and Validity Analysis 85 5.3.2. Descriptive Analysis and Mann-Whitney U-test 85 5.3.2.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants 85 5.3.2.2. Effects of the Use of Intelligent Personal Assistants on Quality of Life 87 5.3.3. Analysis on the Written Interview 89 5.3.3.1. Analysis on Issues Related to User Experience from the Written Interview 89 5.3.3.2. Semantic Network Analysis on the Written Interview 91 5.4. Discussion 99 5.4.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants 99 5.4.1.1. Discussion on the Statistical Analysis 99 5.4.1.2. Discussion on the Analysis on the Written Interview 106 5.4.2. Effects of the Use of Intelligent Personal Assistants on Quality of Life 110 5.4.2.1. Discussion on the Statistical Analysis 110 5.4.2.2. Discussion on the Analysis on the Written Interview 111 5.4.3. Design Implications for User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants for Users with Disabilities 112 5.5. Conclusion 115 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 118 6.1. Summary of this Research 118 6.2. Contributions of this Research 121 6.3. Limitations of this Research and Future Studies 124 BIBLIOGRAPHY 126 APPENDIX 143 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN (๊ตญ๋ฌธ ์ดˆ๋ก) 181Docto

    It's Good to Talk: A Comparison of Using Voice Versus Screen-Based Interactions for Agent-Assisted Tasks

    Get PDF
    Voice assistants have become hugely popular in the home as domestic and entertainment devices. Recently, there has been a move towards developing them for work settings. For example, Alexa for Business and IBM Watson for Business were designed to improve productivity, by assisting with various tasks, such as scheduling meetings and taking minutes. However, this kind of assistance is largely limited to planning and managing user's work. How might they be developed to do more by way of empowering people at work? Our research is concerned with achieving this by developing an agent with the role of a facilitator that assists users during an ongoing task. Specifically, we were interested in whether the modality in which the agent interacts with users makes a difference: How does a voice versus screen-based agent interaction affect user behavior? We hypothesized that voice would be more immediate and emotive, resulting in more fluid conversations and interactions. Here, we describe a user study that compared the benefits of using voice versus screen-based interactions when interacting with a system incorporating an agent, involving pairs of participants doing an exploratory data analysis task that required them to make sense of a series of data visualizations. The findings from the study show marked differences between the two conditions, with voice resulting in more turn-taking in discussions, questions asked, more interactions with the system and a tendency towards more immediate, faster-paced discussions following agent prompts. We discuss the possible reasons for why talking and being prompted by a voice assistant may be preferable and more effective at mediating human-human conversations and we translate some of the key insights of this research into design implications

    An aesthetics of touch: investigating the language of design relating to form

    Get PDF
    How well can designers communicate qualities of touch? This paper presents evidence that they have some capability to do so, much of which appears to have been learned, but at present make limited use of such language. Interviews with graduate designer-makers suggest that they are aware of and value the importance of touch and materiality in their work, but lack a vocabulary to fully relate to their detailed explanations of other aspects such as their intent or selection of materials. We believe that more attention should be paid to the verbal dialogue that happens in the design process, particularly as other researchers show that even making-based learning also has a strong verbal element to it. However, verbal language alone does not appear to be adequate for a comprehensive language of touch. Graduate designers-makersโ€™ descriptive practices combined non-verbal manipulation within verbal accounts. We thus argue that haptic vocabularies do not simply describe material qualities, but rather are situated competences that physically demonstrate the presence of haptic qualities. Such competencies are more important than groups of verbal vocabularies in isolation. Design support for developing and extending haptic competences must take this wide range of considerations into account to comprehensively improve designersโ€™ capabilities

    Binaural virtual auditory display for music discovery and recommendation

    Get PDF
    Emerging patterns in audio consumption present renewed opportunity for searching or navigating music via spatial audio interfaces. This thesis examines the potential benefits and considerations for using binaural audio as the sole or principal output interface in a music browsing system. Three areas of enquiry are addressed. Specific advantages and constraints in spatial display of music tracks are explored in preliminary work. A voice-led binaural music discovery prototype is shown to offer a contrasting interactive experience compared to a mono smartspeaker. Results suggest that touch or gestural interaction may be more conducive input modes in the former case. The limit of three binaurally spatialised streams is identified from separate data as a usability threshold for simultaneous presentation of tracks, with no evident advantages derived from visual prompts to aid source discrimination or localisation. The challenge of implementing personalised binaural rendering for end-users of a mobile system is addressed in detail. A custom framework for assessing head-related transfer function (HRTF) selection is applied to data from an approach using 2D rendering on a personal computer. That HRTF selection method is developed to encompass 3D rendering on a mobile device. Evaluation against the same criteria shows encouraging results in reliability, validity, usability and efficiency. Computational analysis of a novel approach for low-cost, real-time, head-tracked binaural rendering demonstrates measurable advantages compared to first order virtual Ambisonics. Further perceptual evaluation establishes working parameters for interactive auditory display use cases. In summation, the renderer and identified tolerances are deployed with a method for synthesised, parametric 3D reverberation (developed through related research) in a final prototype for mobile immersive playlist editing. Task-oriented comparison with a graphical interface reveals high levels of usability and engagement, plus some evidence of enhanced flow state when using the eyes-free binaural system

    Computational Intelligence and Human- Computer Interaction: Modern Methods and Applications

    Get PDF
    The present book contains all of the articles that were accepted and published in the Special Issue of MDPIโ€™s journal Mathematics titled "Computational Intelligence and Humanโ€“Computer Interaction: Modern Methods and Applications". This Special Issue covered a wide range of topics connected to the theory and application of different computational intelligence techniques to the domain of humanโ€“computer interaction, such as automatic speech recognition, speech processing and analysis, virtual reality, emotion-aware applications, digital storytelling, natural language processing, smart cars and devices, and online learning. We hope that this book will be interesting and useful for those working in various areas of artificial intelligence, humanโ€“computer interaction, and software engineering as well as for those who are interested in how these domains are connected in real-life situations

    Supporting Voice-Based Natural Language Interactions for Information Seeking Tasks of Various Complexity

    Get PDF
    Natural language interfaces have seen a steady increase in their popularity over the past decade leading to the ubiquity of digital assistants. Such digital assistants include voice activated assistants, such as Amazon's Alexa, as well as text-based chat bots that can substitute for a human assistant in business settings (e.g., call centers, retail / banking websites) and at home. The main advantages of such systems are their ease of use and - in the case of voice-activated systems - hands-free interaction. The majority of tasks undertaken by users of these commercially available voice-based digital assistants are simple in nature, where the responses of the agent are often determined using a rules-based approach. However, such systems have the potential to support users in completing more complex and involved tasks. In this dissertation, I describe experiments investigating user behaviours when interacting with natural language systems and how improvements in design of such systems can benefit the user experience. Currently available commercial systems tend to be designed in a way to mimic superficial characteristics of a human-to-human conversation. However, the interaction with a digital assistant differs significantly from the interaction between two people, partly due to limitations of the underlying technology such as automatic speech recognition and natural language understanding. As computing technology evolves, it may make interactions with digital assistants resemble those between humans. The first part of this thesis explores how users will perceive the systems that are capable of human-level interaction, how users will behave while communicating with such systems, and new opportunities that may be opened by that behaviour. Even in the absence of the technology that allows digital assistants to perform on a human level, the digital assistants that are widely adopted by people around the world are found to be beneficial for a number of use-cases. The second part of this thesis describes user studies aiming at enhancing the functionality of digital assistants using the existing level of technology. In particular, chapter 6 focuses on expanding the amount of information a digital assistant is able to deliver using a voice-only channel, and chapter 7 explores how expanded capabilities of voice-based digital assistants would benefit people with visual impairments. The experiments presented throughout this dissertation produce a set of design guidelines for existing as well as potential future digital assistants. Experiments described in chapters 4, 6, and 7 focus on supporting the task of finding information online, while chapter 5 considers a case of guiding a user through a culinary recipe. The design recommendations provided by this thesis can be generalised in four categories: how naturally a user can communicate their thoughts to the system, how understandable the system's responses are to the user, how flexible the system's parameters are, and how diverse the information delivered by the system is

    Safe and Sound: Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Auditory Display

    Get PDF
    Complete proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD2022), June 24-27. Online virtual conference
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore