Digital interaction: where are we going?

In the framework of the AVI 2018 Conference, the interuniversity center ECONA has organized a thematic workshop on "Digital Interaction: where are we going?". Six contributions from the ECONA members investigate different perspectives around this thematic

A Chatbot Solution for eGLU-Box Pro: The Usability Evaluation Platform for Italian Public Administrations

This paper shows a chatbot solution for eGLU-box Pro, a usability testing platform for Italian Public Administration (PA). eGLU-box Pro is a web-based tool designed to help PA practitioners in creating remote usability tests and analyzing participants’ answers and interaction data after they complete the usability tasks. The impact of the chatbot solution on users’ experience was assessed by bio-behavioral evaluation methods such as eye tracking, electroencephalography, and facial expression recognition. This work describes the platform and its integrated chatbot solution and shows the results of a preliminary laboratory study involving 20 end-users. The study is part of an ongoing design and development project based on a user-centered approach

eGLU-Box Mobile:A Smartphone App for Usability Testing by Italian Public Administration Webmasters

Smartphones and tablets now offer consumers unique advantages such as portability and accessibility. Developers are also working with a mobile-first approach, and are prioritizing mobile applications over desktop versions. This study introduces eGLU-box Mobile, an application for performing a drive usability test directly from a smartphone. An experimental study was conducted in which the participants were divided into two groups: an experimental group, which used the new mobile application from a smartphone, and a control group, which used the desktop application from a computer. The participants’ behavior was assessed using explicit (self-report questionnaires) and implicit measures (eye movement data). The results were encouraging, and showed that both the mobile and desktop versions of eGLU-box enabled participants to test the usability with a similar level of UX, despite some minimal (although significant) differences in terms of satisfaction of use

World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review

<p><b>Purpose:</b> This systematic review examines research and practical applications of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a basis for establishing specific criteria for evaluating relevant international scientific literature. The aims were to establish the extent of international dissemination and use of WHODAS 2.0 and analyze psychometric research on its various translations and adaptations. In particular, we wanted to highlight which psychometric features have been investigated, focusing on the factor structure, reliability, and validity of this instrument.</p> <p><b>Method:</b> Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, we conducted a search for publications focused on “whodas” using the ProQuest, PubMed, and Google Scholar electronic databases.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> We identified 810 studies from 94 countries published between 1999 and 2015. WHODAS 2.0 has been translated into 47 languages and dialects and used in 27 areas of research (40% in psychiatry).</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> The growing number of studies indicates increasing interest in the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing individual functioning and disability in different settings and individual health conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 shows strong correlations with several other measures of activity limitations; probably due to the fact that it shares the same disability latent variable with them.</p> <p>Implications for Rehabilitation</p><p>WHODAS 2.0 seems to be a valid, reliable self-report instrument for the assessment of disability.</p><p>The increasing interest in use of the WHODAS 2.0 extends to rehabilitation and life sciences rather than being limited to psychiatry.</p><p>WHODAS 2.0 is suitable for assessing health status and disability in a variety of settings and populations.</p><p>A critical issue for rehabilitation is that a single “minimal clinically important .difference” score for the WHODAS 2.0 has not yet been established.</p><p></p> <p>WHODAS 2.0 seems to be a valid, reliable self-report instrument for the assessment of disability.</p> <p>The increasing interest in use of the WHODAS 2.0 extends to rehabilitation and life sciences rather than being limited to psychiatry.</p> <p>WHODAS 2.0 is suitable for assessing health status and disability in a variety of settings and populations.</p> <p>A critical issue for rehabilitation is that a single “minimal clinically important .difference” score for the WHODAS 2.0 has not yet been established.</p

Heuristic Evaluation of eGLU-Box: A Semi-automatic Usability Evaluation Tool for Public Administrations

This paper illustrates the heuristic evaluation of a web-based tool for usability testing for Public Administrations called eGLU-box. eGLU-box is an online platform aiming at supporting practitioners in the process of de-signing usability tests, analyzing data, and helping step-by-step participants to complete assessment tasks. Web users of Public Administrations can report their perceived quality of experience by completing a library of questionnaires shown to them by eGLU-box at the end of the test. This work is part of a multi-step user experience (UX) evaluation methodology to assess the platform. The UX evaluation methodology of eGLU-box uses standard and bio-behavioural evaluation methods. This work shows the results of the heuristic evaluation of eGLU-box involving five human factors experts and 20 practitioners working in Italian Public Administrations. Findings show that most of the problems are rated as minor problems and related to Nielsen’s heuristic, “visibility of the system.” Only 9% of problems are rated as major problems. These major problems are related to the “problematic match between system and the real world” heuristic. Evaluators provided indications for improvements that will be applied for the next version of the platform

Measuring the experience of remote home workers: A scoping review

Introduction: Working from home (WFH) remotely is a modality of working that requires the careful design of systems of rules and tools to enable people to exchange information and perform actions. WFH is expected to expand after the COVID-19 pandemic, and how best to reliably assess and compare the experience of workers with different (sociotechnical) systems of WFH is central to the diffusion of acceptable modalities of remote working. However, the concept of experience and how it can be measured in the domain in WFH is yet to be clearly characterized. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology for scoping reviews, we systematically map the approaches used by researchers to assess WFH, identify which aspects are usually investigated, and examine how such aspects are usually measured in terms of questions and tools. Literature is collected using Scopus and Web of Science. Results: Thirty-four records out of 323 focusing either on validating a scale, presenting theoretically the experience of workers or testing this empirically are included in the qualitative synthesis. The results highlight a lack of unified terminology and tools, with assessments of workers’ experience mainly characterized by survey approaches and qualitative questions. Conclusion: Clustering together the most investigated aspects in the literature and reviewing how these aspects are assessed, we propose a list of 10 relevant overarching dimensions and attempt to define workers’ experience in the domain of WFH remotely. This definition can be used as a tool by researchers aiming to assess the experience of workers in order to inform the design or redesign of the sociotechnical systems that enable WFH

Inside pandora’s box: a systematic review of the assessment of the perceived quality of chatbots for people with disabilities or special needs

Introduction: People with disabilities or special needs can benefit from AI-based conversational agents (i.e., chatbots) that are used for competence training and well-being management. Assessing the quality of interactions with these chatbots is key to being able to reduce dissatisfaction with them and to understanding their potential long-term benefit. This in turn will help to increase adherence to their use, thereby improving the quality of life of the large population of end-users that they are able to serve. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, we systematically reviewed the literature on methods of assessing the perceived quality of interactions with chatbots using the from Scopus and the Web of Science electronic databases. Using the Boolean operators (AND/OR) the keywords chatbot*, conversational agent*, special needs, disability were combined. Results: Revealed that only 15 of 192 papers on this topic included people with disabilities or special needs in their assessments. The results also highlighted the lack of a shared theoretical framework for assessing the perceived quality of interactions with chatbots. Conclusion: Systematic procedures based on reliable and valid methodologies continue to be needed in this field. The current lack of reliable tools and systematic methods to assess chatbots for people with disabilities and special needs is concerning, and ultimately, it may also lead to unreliable systems entering the market with disruptive consequences for people

A Chatbot Solution for eGLU-Box Pro: The Usability Evaluation Platform for Italian Public Administrations

This paper shows a chatbot solution for eGLU-box Pro, a usability testing platform for Italian Public Administration (PA). eGLU-box Pro is a web-based tool designed to help PA practitioners in creating remote usability tests and analyzing participants’ answers and interaction data after they complete the usability tasks. The impact of the chatbot solution on users’ experience was assessed by bio-behavioral evaluation methods such as eye tracking, electroencephalography, and facial expression recognition. This work describes the platform and its integrated chatbot solution and shows the results of a preliminary laboratory study involving 20 end-users. The study is part of an ongoing design and development project based on a user-centered approach