1 / 14

Transferability

Transferability . Results of WG3 meeting London March 1-2 2012 Ebba Þóra Hvannberg. Second session. After reviewing the analysis of the 18 papers, the six groups were asked to answer the following three questions . Questions .

garron
Télécharger la présentation

Transferability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Transferability Results of WG3 meeting London March 1-2 2012 Ebba Þóra Hvannberg

  2. Second session • After reviewing the analysis of the 18 papers, the six groups were asked to answer the following three questions

  3. Questions • Did you find any evidence that a method has been transferred from one domain to another? • Did you find any domain specific attributes? • Did you find any criteria for the domain-specific of attributes

  4. Domain specific quality attributes – • Evidence of quality attributes which are specific to domains

  5. Productivity – Japanese survey (Bevan) • Transferability? • Time or money is important and the output can be measured • Productivity

  6. Effectiveness – Japanese survey • Transferability to games • Degree of success of task achieved • From a work/task-oriented domain to a game environment – degree of success of achiving personal goals

  7. Pedagogic quality (Lund University 2012) (Ossianilson & Landgren) • Transferability – potentials yes (from paper) • Pedagogic quality – quality of the content • Can be transferred to the domains that have content, e.g. Web content, movie quality

  8. Criteria for domain specifity of quality attribute – • evidence of quality attributes which are specific to domains

  9. Criterion 1 • Demonstrating the impact of technology (Rice, Newell, Morgan)

  10. Criterion 2 • Difficulty in articulating requirements (Rice, Newell, Morgan) • (my comment: quality attribute of a process)

  11. Transferability – • or evidence of transferrability between domains

  12. Affective responses (to stimuli) (Vanden, Abele, Zaman & DeGlooff, 2011) • Transferability: Yes (marketing -> Toys‘UZ) • Domain specific: • Affective response • Stimulus -> Interaction w stimulus • Adults -> Children • Criteria for domain specificity • Domain where affective response are important • **When you transfer between (Sub) Domains you must adapt

  13. Video Games -> Serious games Pinelle et al. CHI 08 • Transferability: Method: Heuristics evaluation • Criteria • Adaptable between different kinds of games

  14. Cultural heritage museum guides vs. A.?? Guides: Ghiani, Paterno, Santoro (2009) • Transferability: Editor based design supports transferability between two different museums • Small adaptation is needed when you transfer between indoor and outdoor cultural heritage sites.

More Related