Resatsch Ubiquitous Computing

Developing and Evaluating Near Field Communication Applications
2010
ISBN: 978-3-8349-8683-2
Verlag: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Gabler
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 294 Seiten, eBook

Reihe: Informationsmanagement und Computer Aided Team

Florian Resatsch investigates the optimal strategies for developing and evaluating ubiquitous computing applications based on Near Field Communication. He offers a range of design guidelines for NFC applications in four categories: NFC technology, tag infrastructure, devices, and human factors.

Dr. Florian Resatsch completed his doctoral thesis under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Helmut Krcmar at the Chair of Information Systems at the Technische Universität München (TUM). He is the managing partner and co-founder of a company focused on object and location-based information services.

Zielgruppe

Research

Autoren/Hrsg.

Resatsch, Florian

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Foreword;6
2;Acknowledgements;7
3;Abstract;9
4;Contents;11
5;List of Figures;17
6;List of Tables;20
7;Abbreviations;22
8;1 Introduction;25
8.1;1.1 Field of Investigation;26
8.2;1.2 Research Problem;28
8.3;1.3 Research Questions and Objectives;31
8.4;1.4 Methodology;32
8.5;1.5 Thesis Structure;36
9;2 Theoretical Framework;39
9.1;2.1 Ubiquitous Computing;39
9.1.1;2.1.1 Definition;39
9.1.2;2.1.2 Building Blocks;41
9.1.3;2.1.3 Technologies;42
9.1.4;2.1.4 Radio Frequency Identification (RFID);44
9.1.4.1;2.1.4.1 Standards;44
9.1.4.2;2.1.4.2 RFID Tag and Data;45
9.1.4.3;2.1.4.3 Capacity;46
9.1.4.4;2.1.4.4 Shapes and Form;46
9.1.4.5;2.1.4.5 Frequencies;47
9.1.4.6;2.1.4.6 Transmission;48
9.1.4.7;2.1.4.7 Readers and Connectivity;49
9.1.4.8;2.1.4.8 Cost;50
9.1.5;2.1.5 Near Field Communication (NFC);51
9.1.5.1;2.1.5.1 NFC Forum Technology Architecture;51
9.1.5.2;2.1.5.2 Mobile NFC Architecture;53
9.1.5.3;2.1.5.3 Available NFC Phones;54
9.1.5.4;2.1.5.4 Developing with NFC;56
9.1.5.5;2.1.5.5 NFC Tags;57
9.1.6;2.1.6 RFID and NFC Information Systems;58
9.2;2.2 Ubiquitous Computing Technologies and the Consumer;59
9.2.1;2.2.1 Categorization of Applications Using the Example of RFID;59
9.2.2;2.2.2 User Awareness and Perception of RFID;61
9.3;2.3 The Importance of Prototyping;68
10;3 Human Computer Interaction and Technology Acceptance;70
10.1;3.1 Human Computer Interaction;70
10.1.1;3.1.1 Human Aspects;71
10.1.1.1;3.1.1.1 The End-User;71
10.1.1.2;3.1.1.2 Behavioral Constraints of the End-User;72
10.1.1.3;3.1.1.3 Everyday Tasks;73
10.1.1.4;3.1.1.4 Cognitive Limitations;74
10.1.1.5;3.1.1.5 Context-Sensitive Applications to Limit the Cognitive Load;76
10.1.2;3.1.2 Human Computer Interface;77
10.1.2.1;3.1.2.1 Multimodal Interaction;78
10.1.2.2;3.1.2.2 Haptic Interfaces;79
10.1.2.3;3.1.2.3 Affordances;81
10.1.2.4;3.1.2.4 The Interaction Design of an Everyday Task;81
10.1.2.5;3.1.2.5 Interaction between Physical Objects and Mobile Devices;82
10.1.3;3.1.3 Summary: Preliminary Set of Requirements;84
10.2;3.2 Technology Acceptance;87
10.2.1;3.2.1 Technology Acceptance Evaluation in Ubiquitous Computing;87
10.2.2;3.2.2 Innovation Adoption;88
10.2.3;3.2.3 Technology Acceptance Models;92
10.2.3.1;3.2.3.1 Social Cognitive Theory (SCT);93
10.2.3.2;3.2.3.2 Theory of Reasoned Action / Theory of Planned Behaviour (TRA/TPB);93
10.2.3.3;3.2.3.3 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM);94
10.2.3.4;3.2.3.4 Task-Technology Fit (TTF);95
10.2.3.5;3.2.3.5 Motivational Model (MM);96
10.2.3.6;3.2.3.6 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT);96
10.2.3.7;3.2.3.7 Critical Assessment of Acceptance Models;106
10.2.4;3.2.4 Summary: Technology Acceptance and Implications;107
11;4 Designing an Ubiquitous Computing Application Development and Evaluation Process Model (UCAN);109
11.1;4.1 Ubiquitous Computing Application Development;109
11.1.1;4.1.1 Determining Initial Requirements;110
11.1.2;4.1.2 Challenges;112
11.1.3;4.1.3 End-User Integration;113
11.1.4;4.1.4 Prototypes;114
11.1.5;4.1.5 System Engineering and Prototyping;116
11.2;4.2 Evaluating Ubicomp Applications;117
11.2.1;4.2.1 Challenges;117
11.2.2;4.2.2 Evaluating Prototypes;118
11.2.3;4.2.3 Evaluation in Specific Prototype Phases;120
11.3;4.3 A-priori: The Ubiquitous Computing Application Development and Evaluation Process Model (UCAN);125
11.4;4.4 Selection of Case Studies;126
11.4.1;4.4.1 NFC Applications;126
11.4.1.1;4.4.1.1 Technology Push;127
11.4.1.2;4.4.1.2 Market Pull;127
11.4.2;4.4.2 Selection Criteria;127
11.4.3;4.4.3 Motivation;129
11.4.4;4.4.4 Conducting the Case Studies;130
11.4.5;4.4.5 Overview;131
12;5 From Initial Idea to Low-Fidelity Prototype: Easymeeting and the Mobile Prosumer;133
12.1;5.1 Easymeeting: Meeting Room Management System;133
12.1.1;5.1.1 Vision of a Motivating Application;134
12.1.2;5.1.2 General Problem: Ubiquitous Computing in a Work Environment;135
12.1.3;5.1.3 Initial Idea;135
12.1.4;5.1.4 Evaluation of the Initial Idea;135
12.1.5;5.1.5 Refined Idea;136
12.1.6;5.1.6 Low-Fidelityy Prototypee;139
12.1.7;5.1.7 Evaluation of the Low-Fidelity Prototype;142
12.1.7.1;5.1.7.1 Research Methodology;142
12.1.7.2;5.1.7.2 Sample;143
12.1.7.3;5.1.7.3 Data Collection and Data Coding;143
12.1.8;5.1.8 Evaluation Results of the Low-Fidelity Prototype;144
12.1.8.1;5.1.8.1 Evaluation Results—Qualitative with ”Talking out Loud” Method;144
12.1.8.2;5.1.8.2 Evaluation Results—Quantitative According UTAUT Items;145
12.1.9;5.1.9 Refined Use Case;148
12.1.10;5.1.10 Summary of the Results—Easymeeting;150
12.1.10.1;5.1.10.1 Improve and Theorize about the Developed Process Model (UCAN);150
12.1.10.2;5.1.10.2 Preparing Design Guidelines;152
12.2;5.2 Mobile Prosumer: Smart Product Information System at the Point of Sale;154
12.2.1;5.2.1 Vision of a Motivating Application;156
12.2.2;5.2.2 General Problem: Smart Products and Information Services;156
12.2.2.1;5.2.2.1 Differences in Online and Offline Shopping;157
12.2.2.2;5.2.2.2 Smart Products—Bridging the Gap of Offline and Online Information;157
12.2.2.3;5.2.2.3 Demand for RFID-based Information Services at the Point of Sale;159
12.2.3;5.2.3 Initial Idea;160
12.2.4;5.2.4 Evaluation of the Initial Idea;161
12.2.5;5.2.5 Refined Idea;161
12.2.6;5.2.6 Low-Fidelity Prototype;162
12.2.7;5.2.7 Evaluation of the Low-Fidelity Prototype;163
12.2.7.1;5.2.7.1 Research Methodology;164
12.2.7.2;5.2.7.2 Sample;165
12.2.7.3;5.2.7.3 Data Collection and Data Coding;166
12.2.8;5.2.8 General Evaluation Results;166
12.2.8.1;5.2.8.1 Experiences and Attitude towards Shopping;166
12.2.8.2;5.2.8.2 Evaluating the Initial Idea—Paper-based Concept Test;167
12.2.9;5.2.9 Low-Fidelity Prototype Evaluation;169
12.2.9.1;5.2.9.1 Low-Fidelity Prototype Evaluation—Focus Group 1: Consumers;169
12.2.9.2;5.2.9.2 Low-Fidelity Prototype Evaluation—Focus Group 2: Sales Assistants;169
12.2.10;5.2.10 Refined Use Case;170
12.2.11;5.2.11 Summary of the Results – Mobile Prosumer;173
12.2.11.1;5.2.11.1 Improve and Theorize about the Developed Process Model (UCAN);173
12.2.11.2;5.2.11.2 Preparing Design Guidelines;175
13;6 Working Prototype: An NFC-based Mobile Phone Ticketing System;177
13.1;6.1 From the Initial Idea to the Working Prototype;178
13.2;6.2 Working Prototype;181
13.3;6.3 Evaluation of the Working Prototype;183
13.3.1;6.3.1 Sample;185
13.3.2;6.3.2 Preparing the Research Design;186
13.3.2.1;6.3.2.1 Questionnaire Concept;186
13.3.2.2;6.3.2.2 Adaptation of Original UTAUT Constructs;186
13.3.2.3;6.3.2.3 Summary of Items and Constructs;195
13.3.2.4;6.3.2.4 Determining Measurement Points;196
13.3.3;6.3.3 Data Collection;197
13.3.4;6.3.4 Data Processing;198
13.4;6.4 Data Analysis and Interpretation;199
13.4.1;6.4.1 Data Analysis;199
13.4.2;6.4.2 PLS Analysis;200
13.4.3;6.4.3 Interpretation;205
13.4.3.1;6.4.3.1 Behavioural Intention;205
13.4.3.2;6.4.3.2 Performance Expectancy;208
13.4.3.3;6.4.3.3 Effort Expectancy;209
13.4.3.4;6.4.3.4 Social Influence;209
13.4.3.5;6.4.3.5 Attitude towards Using Technology;210
13.4.3.6;6.4.3.6 Self Efficacy;210
13.4.3.7;6.4.3.7 Anxiety;210
13.4.3.8;6.4.3.8 Facilitating Conditions;210
13.4.4;6.4.4 PLS Multi-Group Comparisons;211
13.4.5;6.4.5 Further Results;211
13.4.6;6.4.6 Direct Limitations;213
13.5;6.5 Summary of the Results;215
13.5.1;6.5.1 Improve and Theorize about the Developed Process Model (UCAN);215
13.5.1.1;6.5.1.1 Benefits of the Process;215
13.5.1.2;6.5.1.2 Limitations of the Proces;216
13.5.1.3;6.5.1.3 Evaluation of the Research Instrument: Quantitative Survey;216
13.5.2;6.5.2 Preparing Design Guidelines;217
14;7 Conclusion, Limitations, and Future Research;219
14.1;7.1 Conclusion;219
14.1.1;7.1.1 Evaluation of the Case Studies;220
14.1.2;7.1.2 Technological Comparison;221
14.1.3;7.1.3 Improving UCAN;223
14.1.4;7.1.4 Design Guidelines for NFC-based Ubiquitous Computing Applications;229
14.1.5;7.1.5 Contributions of the Analysis;236
14.2;7.2 Limitations and Future Research;239
14.2.1;7.2.1 Limitations;239
14.2.2;7.2.2 Future Research;240
15;Bibliography;242
16;Appendix;259

Theoretical Framework.- Human Computer Interaction and Technology Acceptance.- Designing an Ubiquitous Computing Application Development and Evaluation Process Model (UCAN).- From Initial Idea to Low-Fidelity Prototype: Easymeeting and the Mobile Prosumer.- Working Prototype: An NFC-based Mobile Phone Ticketing System.- Conclusion, Limitations, and Future Research.

Leseproben

3 Human Computer Interaction and Technology Acceptance (p. 46-47)

The focus of this chapter is to state the basic requirements of NFC-based applications relative to human-computer interaction theory (Chapter 3.1). It also seeks to further integrate the technology acceptance models to be applied into the Ubicomp setting (Chapter 3.2).

3.1 Human Computer Interaction

The connection between human computer interaction (HCI) and Ubicomp was discussed from Ubicomp’s early stages up to today (Abowd 1996; Abowd/Atkeson/Essa 1998; Abowd et al. 1998; Abowd/Mynatt/Rodden 2002). Abowd also discussed the effects of prototypes in the area of Ubicomp to facilitate technology diffusion (Abowd et al. 2005). Interfaces of various kinds were discussed intensely in Ubicomp literature—especially because the use of haptic elements, such as RFID chips, changes the established forms of interaction familiar from desktop computers (Henseler 2001; Michelis et al. 2005; Poupyrev/Okabe/Maruyama 2004; Ishii/Ullmer 1997; Blackler/Popovic/Mahar 2003; Öquist 2006; Thevenin/Coutaz 1999; Ballagas et al. 2003; Tan 2000; Shneiderman 1992; Raskin 2000; Mantyjarvi et al. 2006; Välkkynen et al. 2003).

Only few of the known literature approaches discuss the effects of everyday activities and principles associated with routine tasks, although these effects were part of the Ubicomp vision and are relevant for building systems that will be accepted by users (Mattern 2003b, 2003c, 2005b; McCullough 2004; Weiser 1993).

Human beings have one thing in common: an everyday life and the range of actions that life encompasses. The Ubicomp definition presented included applications within the everyday action range of human beings (see section 2.1.1). This everyday life is determined by several factors that loop back to the development of—and the interaction with—Ubicomp applications.

Ubicomp use is quite different from desktop computer use. Daily life centers around activity spaces (Golledge/Stimson 1997) within specific contexts. With a link from the virtual into the physical world, an interaction design off the desktop becomes essential (McCullough 2004; Norman 1988). Ubicomp applications should function only when we want them to and in a way in which we do not need to know how they function.

These “information appliances” (Norman 1999b, 53) allow people to carry out tasks without needing to be aware of the computers that are involved (McCullough 2004). Simplicity, as already stated, is the primary motivation driving the design of information appliances. Design the tool to fit so well that it becomes a part of the task (Norman 1999b, 53). This design credo describes a way of creating computers so that they are invisible to us perceptually, i.e. so that we are not conscious of them.

Human Computer Interaction (HCI) is defined as “a discipline concerned with the design, evaluation and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use and with the study of major phenomena surrounding them.” The focus is “specifically on interaction between one or more humans and one or more computational machines”, which together form an adequate context for Ubicomp (Hewett et al. 1992). HCI has two sides, both the machine and the human side, connected via an interface. An interface can exist in different ways. Raskin gives a broad definition: “The way that you accomplish tasks with a product—what you do and how it responds” (Raskin 2000).

Über Autor(innen)

Dr. Florian Resatsch completed his doctoral thesis under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Helmut Krcmar at the Chair of Information Systems at the Technische Universität München (TUM). He is the managing partner and co-founder of a company focused on object and location-based information services.