Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3314183.3324978acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesumapConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

YesElf: Personalized Onboarding for Web Applications

Published: 06 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Onboarding users to a complex application or a new functionality can be a serious issue, especially for organizations that need to train their new employees. Using a complex application without proper training or guidance can lead to users' confusion and frustration. In this paper, we introduce the onboarding platform YesElf intended for web applications. Its approach to onboarding is to use embedded guides within the application; its novelty lies in the robustness, ease of setup and integration of the YesElf guides into any web-based application. Most importantly, YesElf supports personalized adaptation of user guidance. This, we demonstrate by a novel method for automated recognition of user's confusion in real time that we integrated into YesElf. The information on user's confusion serves as a basis for adaptive display of the guides, when they are needed the most. We evaluated the proposed method on the data collected in a user study with 60 participants and achieved 63% precision which outperforms the state-of-the-art classifier based on the eye tracking data (although, in our case, we used the more readily available mouse movement data).

References

[1]
Roman Bednarik, Hana Vrzakova, and Michal Hradis. 2012. What Do You Want to Do Next: A Novel Approach for Intent Prediction in Gaze-based Interaction. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications (ETRA '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 83--90.
[2]
Maria Bielikova, Martin Konopka, Jakub Simko, Robert Moro, Jozef Tvarozek, Patrik Hlavac, and Eduard Kuric. 2018. Eye-tracking en masse: Group user studies, lab infrastructure, and practices. Journal of Eye Movement Research 11, 3 (Aug. 2018).
[3]
Nitesh V Chawla, Kevin W Bowyer, Lawrence O Hall, and W Philip Kegelmeyer. 2002. SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Journal of artificial intelligence research 16 (2002), 321--357.
[4]
Krishna Depura and Mohit Garg. 2012. Application of online gamification to new hire onboarding. In 3rd Int. Conf. on Services in Emerging Markets (ICSEM'12). IEEE, 153--156.
[5]
Markus Funk, Andreas Bächler, Liane Bächler, Thomas Kosch, Thomas Heidenreich, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2017. Working with Augmented Reality?: A Long-Term Analysis of In-Situ Instructions at the Assembly Workplace. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 222--229.
[6]
Hugo Gamboa and Ana Fred. 2003. A User Authentication Technique Using a Web Interaction Monitoring System. In Iberian Conference on Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis. Springer, 246--254.
[7]
Hugo Gamboa and Ana Fred. 2004. A behavioral biometric system based on human-computer interaction. In Biometric Technology for Human Identification, Vol. 5404. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 381--393.
[8]
Bernhard Göschlberger and Peter A. Bruck. 2017. Gamification in Mobile and Workplace Integrated Microlearning. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services (iiWAS '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 545--552.
[9]
Suniti Hewett, Karen Becker, and Adelle Bish. 2019. Blended workplace learning: The value of human interaction. Education+ Training 61, 1 (2019), 2--16.
[10]
Michal Kompan, Ondrej Kassak, and Maria Bielikova. 2019. The Short-term User Modeling for Predictive Applications. Journal on Data Semantics 8, 1 (01 Mar 2019), 21--37.
[11]
Peter Kratky and Daniela Chuda. 2018. Recognition of web users with the aid of biometric user model. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 51, 3 (2018), 621--646.
[12]
Sébastien Lallé, Cristina Conati, and Giuseppe Carenini. 2016. Predicting Confusion in Information Visualization from Eye Tracking and Interaction Data. In IJCAI. 2529--2535.
[13]
Sébastien Lallé, Dereck Toker, Cristina Conati, and Giuseppe Carenini. 2015. Prediction of Users' Learning Curves for Adaptation while Using an Information Visualization. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces - IUI '15. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 357--368.
[14]
Allison Nederveld and Zane L Berge. 2015. Flipped learning in the workplace. Journal of Workplace Learning 27, 2 (2015), 162--172.
[15]
Jakob Nielsen. 2010. CHAPTER 1 - What Is Usability? In User Experience Re- Mastered, Chauncey Wilson (Ed.). Morgan Kaufmann, Boston, 3 -- 22.
[16]
Fabian Pedregosa, Gaël Varoquaux, Alexandre Gramfort, Vincent Michel, Bertrand Thirion, Olivier Grisel, Mathieu Blondel, Peter Prettenhofer, Ron Weiss, Vincent Dubourg, et al. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of machine learning research 12, Oct (2011), 2825--2830.
[17]
Jan Renz, Thomas Staubitz, Jaqueline Pollack, and Christoph Meinel. 2014. Improving the Onboarding User Experience in MOOCs. Proceedings EduLearn (2014).
[18]
Elena Stefancova, Robert Moro, and Maria Bielikova. 2018. Towards Detection of Usability Issues by Measuring Emotions. In New Trends in Databases and Information Systems, András Benczúr, Bernhard Thalheim, Tomác Horváth, Silvia Chiusano, Tania Cerquitelli, Csaba Sidló, and Peter Z. Revesz (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 63--70.
[19]
Ngoc Thuy Thi Thai, Bram De Wever, and Martin Valcke. 2017. The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best "blend" of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education 107 (2017), 113--126.
[20]
Paul Thomas. 2014. Using interaction data to explain difficulty navigating online. ACM Trans. on the Web 8, 4 (2014), 24.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Is mouse dynamics information credible for user behavior research? An empirical investigationComputer Standards & Interfaces10.1016/j.csi.2024.10384990:COnline publication date: 1-Aug-2024
  • (2021)Guided ExplorationProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/34617315:EICS(1-34)Online publication date: 29-May-2021
  • (2020)Evaluating an Interactive Memory Analysis Tool: Findings from a Cognitive Walkthrough and a User StudyProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/33949774:EICS(1-37)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. YesElf: Personalized Onboarding for Web Applications

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    UMAP'19 Adjunct: Adjunct Publication of the 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
    June 2019
    455 pages
    ISBN:9781450367110
    DOI:10.1145/3314183
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 06 June 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. confusion detection
    2. guides
    3. onboarding
    4. personalization

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • Ministerstvo ?kolstva, vedy, v?skumu a ?portu Slovenskej republiky
    • Agentúra na Podporu Vðskumu a Vðvoja
    • Vedecká Grantová Agentúra MðVVað SR a SAV

    Conference

    UMAP '19
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    UMAP'19 Adjunct Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 122 submissions, 25%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 162 of 633 submissions, 26%

    Upcoming Conference

    UMAP '25

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)60
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)13
    Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Is mouse dynamics information credible for user behavior research? An empirical investigationComputer Standards & Interfaces10.1016/j.csi.2024.10384990:COnline publication date: 1-Aug-2024
    • (2021)Guided ExplorationProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/34617315:EICS(1-34)Online publication date: 29-May-2021
    • (2020)Evaluating an Interactive Memory Analysis Tool: Findings from a Cognitive Walkthrough and a User StudyProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/33949774:EICS(1-37)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2020
    • (2020)A Gamified Solution to the Cold-Start Problem of Intelligent Tutoring SystemArtificial Intelligence in Education10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_68(376-381)Online publication date: 30-Jun-2020
    • (2020)Scalable Real-Time Confusion Detection for Personalized Onboarding GuidesWeb Engineering10.1007/978-3-030-50578-3_18(261-276)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2020

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media