Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User...

download Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User Experience on ibm.com Impacts of User Privacy Preferences

of 61

  • date post

    20-Dec-2015
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    221
  • download

    4

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User...

  • Slide 1
  • Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User Experience on ibm.com Impacts of User Privacy Preferences on Personalized Systems a Comparative Study Frans Faizal ffaizal@ics.uci.edu ICS 206 Spring 2003
  • Slide 2
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 2 Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User Experience on ibm.com Impacts of User Privacy Preferences on Personalized Systems a Comparative Study
  • Slide 3
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 3 Describes user studies that focused on the perceived value of a variety of personalization features for an eCommerce Web site for computing machinery sales and support. Describes how the results of the studies affect the design of user-adaptive applications. Overview
  • Slide 4
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 4 Personalization The use of information about a particular user to provide tailored (personalized) user experiences for that user. A personalized Web site A system that adapts the content structure, and/or presentation of the networked hypermedia objects to each individual users characteristics, usage behavior, and/or usage environment. Definitions
  • Slide 5
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 5 Purpose To determine which specific personalization features would be judged the most usable, valuable, and attractive to users of an eCommerce Web sites. Gathered a large amount of quantitative and qualitative data. Written and spoken opinions, written questionnaires, think aloud protocols, free-form group and one-on- one discussions, as well as direct observations. Overview of User Studies (1)
  • Slide 6
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 6 Obtained clear attitudes of users toward adaptive techniques that were intrinsic to the implementation and design of the personalization features being tested. Conducted three studies, carried out in multiple laboratory settings. Each has different participants and different methodologies (group vs. individual study). Overview of User Studies (2)
  • Slide 7
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 7 Started with 75 techniques (clustered based on similarities). Wanted to refine the list based on measure of effectiveness, usefulness, and user attitudes derived from successive user studies. Personalization Feature Space
  • Slide 8
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 8
  • Slide 9
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 9 Two prototype systems: low-fidelity (Study 1 & 2) and interactive versions (Study 3). Implemented in Microsoft PowerPoint and presented on an IBM ThinkPad computer. Low-fidelity prototype consisted of screen shots. Lead experimenter clicked on a widget and the response was displayed on the screen. Prototype Adaptive Web Site (1)
  • Slide 10
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 10 Designed to demonstrate specific personalization and adaptive features. Exemplified a Web site (a system) that maintains a profile of the users personal information and tailors the sites content to that user based on the profile and navigational context. PersonalBook Central personalization tool that is closely tied to user profile. Prototype Adaptive Web Site (2)
  • Slide 11
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 11
  • Slide 12
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 12
  • Slide 13
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 13 Used to capture both quantitative and qualitative data. Also asked subjects to rate the personalization features demonstrated in each study. Stated as assertions. E.g., you control all the data kept in your profile and can review and edit it at any time. Written Questionnaires (1)
  • Slide 14
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 14 In Study 1, participants were asked to rank the features shown based on their value to the participants. In Study 2 & 3, they were asked to rate the features using a 7-point scale (1 is Highly Valuable, 7 is Not at all Valuable). Questionnaires also asked marketing and business case issues (whether subjects thought they would be more likely to come back and buy more). Written Questionnaires (2)
  • Slide 15
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 15 You and your department have made various server, laptop, and desktop purchases. You now think you may have to purchase additional memory to enhance the capabilities of the laptops used by your department members. Starting from your PersonalBook, find 128MB add-on memory chipsets compatible with those laptops. Then also find memory compatible with the desktop machines your department owns User Task Scenario
  • Slide 16
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 16
  • Slide 17
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 17
  • Slide 18
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 18 Users want to be in control of their personal information. Able to review, modify, and delete personal information in their profile. Able to control over who sees and uses the information. Do not want their information gathered implicitly. Able to decide which information to be stored in their profile. Results and Conclusion (1)
  • Slide 19
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 19 Users want to be in control of the content shown on a site. Seems to defeat the purpose of an adaptive site. They are happy as long as the content is generated based on the information they provide explicitly to the system. E.g. content-filtering and content-refinement in the PersonalBook. Results and Conclusion (2)
  • Slide 20
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 20 Adapting content based on implicit information is undesirable. E.g. Compatible Memory scenario. Adapting content based on past navigation is also undesirable. You cant do it well, so dont do it at all. Users want to be invisible during exploratory sessions. I.e. multiple user roles or persona. Results and Conclusion (3)
  • Slide 21
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 21 Adapting content based on transient information is good as long as it is clear what is going on. Collaborative filtering was not supported fully. I am not like other people. I have different needs. Inappropriate products or services? Results and Conclusion (4)
  • Slide 22
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 22 Questions/Comments?
  • Slide 23
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 23 Personalization User Attitudes Regarding a User-Adaptive eCommerce Web Site Personalizing the User Experience on ibm.com Impacts of User Privacy Preferences on Personalized Systems a Comparative Study
  • Slide 24
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 24 Describes a strategy for bringing personalization to the ibm.com public Web site. Overview
  • Slide 25
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 25 Personalizing interaction The use of information about a user to alter the content and functionality of the user experience. Personalizing a Web site Using personal information about an individual to tailor the experience for that individual on the site. Definitions (1)
  • Slide 26
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 26 Personalization policy A decision made by an eCommerce company involving the handling of personal data on the companys Web site. Personalization feature A method for collecting and using personal information in order to tailor a Web site visitors experience on the Web site. A personalization policy applies to the whole Web site, while a feature provides functionality for a particular task on the site. Definitions (2)
  • Slide 27
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 27 Involving customer and provider (producer) roles that interacts with each other. The goal is to provide increased interaction value to both parties using their personal information. Value of customer F(cost of providing info, perceived benefits) Value of company (provider) F(cost of gathering info, perceived value) Personalization for eCommerce
  • Slide 28
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 28 A range of information type and possible values to customers and businesses. The value of techniques to any customer will vary with the role of the customer at any time. The value of a technique to a business will depend on the kind of business objective they have. There are likely to be interactions between techniques resulting in a package of techniques that would be optimally effective. Personalization Value Space
  • Slide 29
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 29 To understand the value of personalization to customers and IBM. To develop the strategy for bringing personalization to the ibm.com public Web site which ensures that the top-priority goals of customers and the business are met. Project Goals
  • Slide 30
  • 06/03/2003 Frans Faizal (ffaizal@ics.uci.edu) 30 Completing a literature review of the published research in the area of personalization. Identify possible personalization features and understand state of the art. Completing a set of heu