A Conceptual Design and Evaluation Framework for Mobile Persuasive Health Technologies (Usability Approach)

A Conceptual Design and Evaluation Framework for Mobile Persuasive Health Technologies (Usability Approach)

Kasali, F. A.1, Awodele, O.2, Kuyoro, S.3, Akinsanya, A.4, Eze, M.5

1,2,3,4,5Department of Computer Science and Information Technology, Babcock University, Ogun State, Nigeria

Research Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science

Persuasive techniques are recently being explored by computer science researchers as an effective strategy towards creating applications that are aimed at positive attitudinal changes especially in the health domain but finding effective evaluation approaches for these technologies remain an herculean task for all stakeholders involved and in order to overcome this limitation, the Persuasive System Design (PSD) model was designed but researchers claim that the model is too theoretical in nature and some of its design principles are too subjective as they cannot be measured quantitatively.
Hence, the focus of this paper is to critically review the PSD model and popular models currently being used to evaluate the usability of information systems as usability has been identified as an important requirement currently used to evaluate the overall success of persuasive technologies.
To achieve the stated objectives, the systematic review method of research was done to objectively analyze the PSD model, its applicability as an evaluation tool was tested on a popular mobile health application installed on the Samsung Galaxy Tablet using android Operation system. Exhaustive evaluation of the application was performed by 5 software usability researchers using the method of cognitive walkthrough.
From the analysis, it was realized that the PSD model is a great tool at designing persuasive technologies but as an evaluation tool, it is too theoretical in nature, its evaluation strategies are too subjective in nature and the 28 principles described in it overlap with one another. As a result, the PSD model was extended with an integrated usability model and the fuzzy Analytic Hierarchical Technique was proposed theoretically to evaluate usability constructs so as to make evaluation of persuasive technologies more quantitative in nature and easier for researchers to analyze their design early enough to minimize developmental efforts and other resources.

Keywords: Persuasive systems, Usability Models, PSD model, Fuzzy Analysis Hierarchical Process

Free Full-text PDF

How to cite this article:
Kasali et al., A Conceptual Design and Evaluation Framework for Mobile Persuasive Health Technologies (Usability Approach). Research Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 2017; 1:4. DOI:10.28933/rjmcs-2017-10-1401


1 Abdessettar, S., Gardoni, M., & Abdulrazak, B. (2016, April 5-7). Enhancing persuasive design’s productivity: Towards a domain-specific language for persuasion strategies. Adjunct Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Persuasive Technology (pp. 2-5). Salzburg, Austria.
2 Adaji, I. (2016). Evaluating personalization and persuasion in e-commerce. Retrieved from ceur.ws.org>Vol-1582>8Adaji
3 Adaji, I. & Vassileva, J. (2016). Evaluating persuasive systems using the PSD framework. Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org>paper
4 Adaji, I., & Vassileva, J. (2016, April 5-7). Persuasive patterns in Q&A social networks. Adjunct Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Persuasive Technology (9638:189-196). Salzburg, Austria. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-31510-2_16
5 Alptekin, N., Hall, E. E., & Sevim, N. (2015). Evaluation of websites quality using fuzzy TOPSIS method. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 5 (8), 221-242
6 Al-Rawashdey, T. (2015). Evaluating open source software usability using a multistage fuzzy model approach. International Review on Computers and Software, 10 (10), 1018-1026
7 Anandhi, V. D., Lauries, P., & Alex, K. (2015, August 17-18). Application of persuasive techniques in the design of mobile ehealth systems. Global Summit on Telemedicine & eHealth. Houston, Texas. USA.
8 AppFutura. (2016, February 1). Everything about mHealth: Figures, best mhealth apps ranking and main players [Blog post]. Retrieved from m.appfutura.com/blog/everything-about-mhealth….
9 Aris, B., Gharbaghi, A., Ahmad, M. H., & Rosli, S. M. (2014). A structural equation model of persuasive features for computer-based mathematics learning, Applied Mathematical Sciences, 8 (112):5569 – 5576
10 Aruldoss, M., Lakshmi, T. M., & Venkatesan, V. P. (2013). A survey on multi criteria decision making methods and its applications. American Journal of Information Systems, 1 (1), 31-43.
11 Chen, F., Zhou, J., Wang, Y., Yu, K., Arshad, S. Z., Khawaji, A., & Conway, D. (2016). Robust multimodal cognitive load measurement. Human-Computer Interaction Series. Sydney, Australia: Springer International Publishing
12 Chittaro, L. (2015, August 24-27). Mobile persuasion for health and safety promotion. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Decisions and Services Adjunct (pp. 878-882). Copenhagen, Denmark. doi: 10.1145/2786567.2786570.
13 Donyaee, M. K., Seffah, A., & Rilling, J. (2006). Exploring the correlation between predictive usability measures and user tests. Retrieved from citeseerx.ist.psu.edu>viewdoc>download
14 Dubey, S. K., Gulati, A., & Rana, A. (2012). Usability evaluation of software systems using fuzzy multi-criteria approach. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 9 (3), 404-409.
15 Fox, S. (2013). Mobile health in context: how information is woven into our lives. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/10/22/mobile-health-in-context
16 Gupta, D., & Ahlawat, A. K. (2016). Usability determination using multistage fuzzy system. Procedia Computer Science, 78: 263-270. Elsevier
17 Hasan, L. A., & Al-Sarayreh, K. T. (2015). An integrated measurement model for evaluating usability attributes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Information Processing, Security and Advanced Communication (94). Batna, Algeria. doi: 10.1145/2816839.2816861
18 Harrison, R., Flood, D., & Duce, D (2013). Usability of mobile applications: Literature review and rationale for a new usability model. Journal of Interaction Science, 1(1). Springer
19 IMS Health. (2013). Patient apps for improved healthcare: from novelty to mainstream. IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (pp. 1-65). Retrieved from http://www.imshealth.com/deployedfiles/imshealth/Global/Content/Corporate/IMS%20Health%20Institute/Rep orts/Patient_Apps/IIHI_Patient_Apps_Report.pdf
20 International Standard Organization, (2002). Ergonomics of human-system interaction: Usability method supporting human-centered design, Retrieved from https://www.nen.nl/pdfpreview_83288.pdf
21 Jarodzka, H., Janssen, N., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2012). Avoiding split attention in computer-based testing: Is neglecting additional information facilitative? Retrieved from dspace.ou.nl/handle/1820/4705
22 Jain, P., Dubey, S. K., & Rana, A. (2012). Software Usability Evaluation Method. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computing Engineering and technology, 1(2), 28-33
23 Juristo, N., Moreno, A. M., & Silva, A. (2002). Is the European industry moving toward solving requirement engineering problems? IEEE, 19(6), 70-77
24 Kathia, M., Christophe, K., Sophie, L., & Ahmed, S. (2014). Predictive usability evaluation: Aligning HCI and software engineering practices, IHM’14, Villeneuve d’Ascq, France ACM 978-1-4503-2935-4/14/10
25 Kientz, J. A., Choe, E. K., Birch, B., Maharaj, R., Fonville, A., Glasson, C., & Mundt, J. (2010, November 11-12). Heuristic evaluation of persuasive health technologies. Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium. Arlington, Virginia, USA. doi; 10.1145/1882992.1883084
26 Krell, M. (2015). Evaluating an instrument to measure mental load and mental effort using item response theory science education review letters. Cogent Education, 4, 1-10. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2017.1280256
27 Langrial, S., Lehto, T., Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Harjumaa, M., & Karppinen, P. (2012). Native mobile applications for personal well-being: A persuasive systems design evaluation. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS) Proceedings. Vietnam.
28 Laucopoulos, P. & Karakostas, V. (1995). System Requirements Engineering. Europe: McGraw-Hill Book.
29 Leandro, G. & Laercio, A. B. (2012). Towards an automatic evaluation of web applications, ACM 978-1-4503-0857-1/12/03, Riva del Garda, Italy
30 Lee, A. H. I., Chen, W. C., & Chang, C. J. (2008). A fuzzy AHP and BSC approach for evaluating performance of IT department in the manufacturing industry in Taiwan. Expert Systems with Applications 34, 96–107.
31 Lehto, T. & Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (2010, June 7-10). Persuasive features in six weight loss websites: A qualitative evaluation. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Persuasive Technology (pp. 162-173). Copenhagen, Denmark. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-13226-1_17
32 Lobo, D., Kaskaloglu, K., Kim, C. Y., & Herbert, S. (2011). Web usability guidelines for smartphones: A synergic approach. International Journal of Information and Electronics Engineering, 1(1), 33-37
33 Mehrotra, D., Bhatia, P. K., & Sharma, A. (2015). Rank university websites using fuzzy ahp and fuzzy TOPSIS approach on usability. International Journal of Information and Electronic Business, 1, 29-36
34 Mendiola, M. F., Kalnicki, M., & Lindenauer, S. (2015). Valuable features in mobile health apps for patients and consumers: Content analysis of apps and user ratings. Journal of Medical Internet Research mHealth uHealth, 3 (2).
35 Mukhtar, H. (2016). Towards analytical modeling for persuasive design choices in mobile apps. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 7 (11).
36 Munassar, N. M. A., & Govardhan, A. (2010). A comparison between five models of software engineering. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 7 (5).
37 Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2009) Persuasive systems design: Key issues, process model, and system features. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24 (28), 485-500
38 Pandey, D. (2013). Requirement engineering research. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Technology, 4 (4).
39 Pandey, D., Suman, U., & Ramani, A. K. (2010, October 16-17). An effective requirement engineering process model for software development and requirements management. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Recent Technologies in Communication and Computing (pp. 287-291). IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, USA. doi: 10.1109/ARTCom2010.24
40 Pandey, U. S., & Ramani, A. (2009). Social-organizational participation difficulties in requirement engineering process-A study. National Conference on Emerging Trends in in Software Engineering and Information Technology. Gwalior Engineering College, Gwalior
41 Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The Elaboration Likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 19. Retrieved on 12th of Nov. 2016 from www.psy.ohio-state.edu/petty/documents/1986ADVANCESsPettyCacioppo.pdf
42 Research2guidance. (2013). Mobile health market report 2013-2017: The commercialization of mhealth applications, 3, 1-115. Retrieved from http://www.research2guidance.com/shop/index.php/mhealth-report-2
43 Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modelling. New York, London. Taylor & Francis Group.
44 Stephen, R. S., Jonathan, A. S., Latika, E. (2015). Make It usable: Highlighting the importance of improving the intuitiveness and usability of a computer-based training simulation, IEEE journal.
45 Thimbleby, H., Cairns, P., & Jones, M. (2001). Usability analysis with Markov models. ACM transactions on computer –human interaction, 8 (2), 99-132
46 Ullman, J. B. (2006). Structural equation modelling. Reviewing the basics and moving forward. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 53-50.
47 Valverde, R. (2011). Principles of human computer interaction design (pp 59-61). Germany: LAP Lambert Academic books.
48 Wang J. J., Jing Y. Y., & Zhang C.F. (2010). Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renewable Sustainable Energy Review, 13, 2263-2278
49 Zhang, D., & Adipat, B. (2005). Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 18(3), 293–308.
50 Zhou, R. (2017). Using a fuzzy comprehension method to determine product usability. Work, 56 (1), 21-29

Terms of Use/Privacy Policy/ Disclaimer/ Other Policies:
You agree that by using our site, you have read, understood, and agreed to be bound by all of our terms of use/privacy policy/ disclaimer/ other policies (click here for details).

This work and its PDF file(s) are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.