SH
S. Huang
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
6 records found
1
Introducing the Fundamental User Needs (FUN) Scales
Assessing Need Satisfaction and Frustration in Design-Mediated Interactions
This paper introduces the Fundamental User Needs (FUN) Scales, tailored to measure need satisfaction and frustration in design-mediated interactions. The development and initial validation process included a preparation phase and four studies. Adopting a deductive approach, we generated a pool of 780 items and distilled them into the first version of the FUN Scales: a 52-item Need Satisfaction Scale and a 52-item Need Frustration Scale. Content validity was assessed by nine experts, leading to a refined second version. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses with 502 participants examined the scales’ factorial structure, reliability, and validity, resulting in a finalized version with 39 items per scale. Finally, we proposed two scoring approaches to facilitate scale application. The FUN Scales can serve as a robust diagnostic tool for quantifying the psychological impact of design and technology through the lens of need fulfillment, offering structure and inspiration for human-centered design research and practice.
...
This paper introduces the Fundamental User Needs (FUN) Scales, tailored to measure need satisfaction and frustration in design-mediated interactions. The development and initial validation process included a preparation phase and four studies. Adopting a deductive approach, we generated a pool of 780 items and distilled them into the first version of the FUN Scales: a 52-item Need Satisfaction Scale and a 52-item Need Frustration Scale. Content validity was assessed by nine experts, leading to a refined second version. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses with 502 participants examined the scales’ factorial structure, reliability, and validity, resulting in a finalized version with 39 items per scale. Finally, we proposed two scoring approaches to facilitate scale application. The FUN Scales can serve as a robust diagnostic tool for quantifying the psychological impact of design and technology through the lens of need fulfillment, offering structure and inspiration for human-centered design research and practice.
Despite the ever-changing wishes and desires accompanying today’s rapid pace of technological innovation, basic psychological needs remain enduring sources for human functioning, development, and well-being. A shared language of needs, further with design-oriented measurement tools, can inform and inspire initiatives in user-centred and/or human-centred design research and practice. [...]
...
Despite the ever-changing wishes and desires accompanying today’s rapid pace of technological innovation, basic psychological needs remain enduring sources for human functioning, development, and well-being. A shared language of needs, further with design-oriented measurement tools, can inform and inspire initiatives in user-centred and/or human-centred design research and practice. [...]
Addressing sustainability challenges requires shifts in consumption patterns and lifestyles. Design for Sustainable Behavior (DfSB) aims to cultivate sustainable attitudes and behaviors through product-based interventions. However, there can be a disconnect between design strategy and its embodiment and sometimes conflicts between designers’ intent and users’ interpretation. This paper explores the role of metaphors in DfSB in terms of using metaphorical thinking during the design process and/or creating product metaphors in the final design. It begins by identifying barriers that prevent people from engaging in sustainable practices, such as human nature and ambiguity in design. It then examines the roles of metaphor in design and its key strengths in DfSB. Furthermore, the paper outlines three methods to generate metaphors in DfSB: (1) The source domain implies the target domain. (2) The source domain serves design goals and strategies. (3) Cross-domain mapping is based on embodied experience. In conclusion, the paper discusses potential issues surrounding its use in DfSB.
...
Addressing sustainability challenges requires shifts in consumption patterns and lifestyles. Design for Sustainable Behavior (DfSB) aims to cultivate sustainable attitudes and behaviors through product-based interventions. However, there can be a disconnect between design strategy and its embodiment and sometimes conflicts between designers’ intent and users’ interpretation. This paper explores the role of metaphors in DfSB in terms of using metaphorical thinking during the design process and/or creating product metaphors in the final design. It begins by identifying barriers that prevent people from engaging in sustainable practices, such as human nature and ambiguity in design. It then examines the roles of metaphor in design and its key strengths in DfSB. Furthermore, the paper outlines three methods to generate metaphors in DfSB: (1) The source domain implies the target domain. (2) The source domain serves design goals and strategies. (3) Cross-domain mapping is based on embodied experience. In conclusion, the paper discusses potential issues surrounding its use in DfSB.
Background: Because the fulfillment of basic/fundamental psychological needs affects people’s motivation and well-being, measuring the degree to which these needs are met is of interest to researchers across various domains. Although numerous self-assessment tools have been developed, no recent comprehensive reviews exist, hindering cumulative scientific progress. The present systematic review aimed to identify and analyze the main approaches to developing self-report scales for assessing basic/fundamental psychological need fulfillment. The objective is to inform readers interested in selecting instruments for their studies and those intending to develop new scales.
Methods: Following PRISMA, we conducted a search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and ProQuest in August 2023. The following information was extracted from eligible studies: Scale name, abbreviation, theoretical basis, application domain, final scale construction, scale development and validation methodology, and citation count.
Results: Our search identified 32 primary studies, in which 31 original scales were developed and validated, and 89 secondary studies that aimed to modify these original scales. The predominant theoretical basis was Self-Determination Theory, although eight scales were based on alternative need typologies. The scales were either domain-general or specific to contexts such as work, education, or exercise/sports contexts. While most were designed to measure need satisfaction, some also addressed need support, frustration, and thwarting.
Conclusion: Despite significant efforts in developing, adapting, and applying scales to measure need fulfillment, we found several issues resulting from diverse perspectives on conceptualizing psychological needs and need typologies, discordant approaches in developing and validating measures, and other inconsistencies that should be acknowledged and addressed in future research. ...
Methods: Following PRISMA, we conducted a search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and ProQuest in August 2023. The following information was extracted from eligible studies: Scale name, abbreviation, theoretical basis, application domain, final scale construction, scale development and validation methodology, and citation count.
Results: Our search identified 32 primary studies, in which 31 original scales were developed and validated, and 89 secondary studies that aimed to modify these original scales. The predominant theoretical basis was Self-Determination Theory, although eight scales were based on alternative need typologies. The scales were either domain-general or specific to contexts such as work, education, or exercise/sports contexts. While most were designed to measure need satisfaction, some also addressed need support, frustration, and thwarting.
Conclusion: Despite significant efforts in developing, adapting, and applying scales to measure need fulfillment, we found several issues resulting from diverse perspectives on conceptualizing psychological needs and need typologies, discordant approaches in developing and validating measures, and other inconsistencies that should be acknowledged and addressed in future research. ...
Background: Because the fulfillment of basic/fundamental psychological needs affects people’s motivation and well-being, measuring the degree to which these needs are met is of interest to researchers across various domains. Although numerous self-assessment tools have been developed, no recent comprehensive reviews exist, hindering cumulative scientific progress. The present systematic review aimed to identify and analyze the main approaches to developing self-report scales for assessing basic/fundamental psychological need fulfillment. The objective is to inform readers interested in selecting instruments for their studies and those intending to develop new scales.
Methods: Following PRISMA, we conducted a search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and ProQuest in August 2023. The following information was extracted from eligible studies: Scale name, abbreviation, theoretical basis, application domain, final scale construction, scale development and validation methodology, and citation count.
Results: Our search identified 32 primary studies, in which 31 original scales were developed and validated, and 89 secondary studies that aimed to modify these original scales. The predominant theoretical basis was Self-Determination Theory, although eight scales were based on alternative need typologies. The scales were either domain-general or specific to contexts such as work, education, or exercise/sports contexts. While most were designed to measure need satisfaction, some also addressed need support, frustration, and thwarting.
Conclusion: Despite significant efforts in developing, adapting, and applying scales to measure need fulfillment, we found several issues resulting from diverse perspectives on conceptualizing psychological needs and need typologies, discordant approaches in developing and validating measures, and other inconsistencies that should be acknowledged and addressed in future research.
Methods: Following PRISMA, we conducted a search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and ProQuest in August 2023. The following information was extracted from eligible studies: Scale name, abbreviation, theoretical basis, application domain, final scale construction, scale development and validation methodology, and citation count.
Results: Our search identified 32 primary studies, in which 31 original scales were developed and validated, and 89 secondary studies that aimed to modify these original scales. The predominant theoretical basis was Self-Determination Theory, although eight scales were based on alternative need typologies. The scales were either domain-general or specific to contexts such as work, education, or exercise/sports contexts. While most were designed to measure need satisfaction, some also addressed need support, frustration, and thwarting.
Conclusion: Despite significant efforts in developing, adapting, and applying scales to measure need fulfillment, we found several issues resulting from diverse perspectives on conceptualizing psychological needs and need typologies, discordant approaches in developing and validating measures, and other inconsistencies that should be acknowledged and addressed in future research.
Needs Matter
A Detailed Typology of Thirteen Fundamental Needs for Human-Centered Design
The relevance of human needs is generally recognized in human-centered design research and practice. However, a challenge of working with needs is that the word “need” can be interpreted in various ways, which can hinder effective communication and collaboration. Need typologies, in such cases, can serve as a shared language by providing an overview of distinct human needs. Building on a design-focused typology of thirteen fundamental needs, this paper introduces a detailed version in which two complementary but distinct facets explain each need. We envision this fine-grained vocabulary of basic human needs can support initiatives in human-centered design research and practice, particularly facilitating and enriching conversations among people from different backgrounds. Furthermore, we propose three directions for future research on this topic.
...
The relevance of human needs is generally recognized in human-centered design research and practice. However, a challenge of working with needs is that the word “need” can be interpreted in various ways, which can hinder effective communication and collaboration. Need typologies, in such cases, can serve as a shared language by providing an overview of distinct human needs. Building on a design-focused typology of thirteen fundamental needs, this paper introduces a detailed version in which two complementary but distinct facets explain each need. We envision this fine-grained vocabulary of basic human needs can support initiatives in human-centered design research and practice, particularly facilitating and enriching conversations among people from different backgrounds. Furthermore, we propose three directions for future research on this topic.
Designing product metaphor to promote sustainable behaviour
A proposed method
Conference paper
(2020)
-
S. Huang, M. Carulli, Paul Hekkert, Hendrik N.J. Schifferstein, M Bordegoni
Within the scope of Design for Sustainable Behaviour, the connection between behavioural change strategies and design idea generation has received limited attention. This paper highlights metaphorical thinking in product design to stimulate sustainable behaviour. In particular, the current study proposes a metaphor-based design method to guide designers on how to associate product features with behavioural and experiential cues through metaphors. We next report two design cases to evaluate this method. In the end, the shortcomings of current research and future developments are also discussed.
...
Within the scope of Design for Sustainable Behaviour, the connection between behavioural change strategies and design idea generation has received limited attention. This paper highlights metaphorical thinking in product design to stimulate sustainable behaviour. In particular, the current study proposes a metaphor-based design method to guide designers on how to associate product features with behavioural and experiential cues through metaphors. We next report two design cases to evaluate this method. In the end, the shortcomings of current research and future developments are also discussed.