SEPIA, a support for engineering persuasive interactive applications

Abstract

Design and creativity call for a large exploration of the design space for getting the design right and the right design [6]. Creativity support tools aim at speeding up this exploration for either saving time or exploring more design alternatives. This paper addresses the design of persuasive interactive systems. It provides designers and developers with a conceptual tool for structuring the exploration of the design space. In the vain of the IFIP properties [1] that are largely used in engineering HCI (e.g., observability), SEPIA (Support for Engineering Persuasive Interactive Applications) elicits a set of properties and functions to be considered when engineering persuasive interactive systems. SEPIA is expected to foster creativity and thereby to make people go beyond the classical monitoring feature.

Persuasive Systems for Energy: Cartography of Design Spaces and Proposition of the UP+ Framework

“…In terms of psychological impact, raising awareness about current consumption seems to be the dominant outcome. This is consistent with Laurillau et al's observation (Laurillau et al, 2016). Motivation and engagement are used frequently, and a number of studies are also concerned with enjoyment and the negative attributes of persuasive systems.…”

“…First, the Mirror function is used in most existing persuasive systems. This finding is consistent with other results from the literature (Froehlich et al, 2010;Hamari, Koivisto & Pakkanen, 2014;Laurillau et al, 2016). By contrast, the What-for function is absent from the other conceptual tools.…”

“…This part reviews eight surveys, design spaces and frameworks from the literature: Pierce et al's dimensions for Eco-Visualizations (Pierce et al, 2008), Froehlich's (Froehlich, 2009) and Fang's design spaces on feedback technologies (Fang & Hsu, 2010), Froehlich's comparative survey of eco-feedback systems (Froehlich et al, 2010), Hamari et al's review of persuasive technologies (Hamari, Koivisto & Pakkanen, 2014), Cano's design space (Cano et al, 2015) and the SEPIA framework (Laurillau et al, 2016). These contributions have been selected for their coverage.…”

“…SEPIA adopts an engineering perspective, making it explicit the properties that a system should satisfy to support persuasion via human-system interaction (Laurillau et al, 2016). Inspired by the properties used to qualify user interfaces (i.e.…”

Bringing Worth Maps a Step Further: A Dedicated Online-Resource

“…However, only a more extensive use of worth maps could help elaborate such a classification (i.e., ontology for worth). In addition to allowing us to get a better understanding of worth, a worth ontology would support new areas of research, such as persuasive technologies [18], which rely on worth but suffer from the lack of visibility and maturity of methods and techniques for worthcentered developments.…”