Cited by 11Service and Product InnovationInnovative Human-Technology InteractionUsability and User Interface Design

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Scenario Interaction-centered Conceptual Information Model for UX Design of User-oriented Product-service System

Open access

Abstract

Nowadays, consumers are no longer merely satisfied with functional use of products. They are seeking for a kind of comprehensive experience which combines multisensory factors and takes the product-service system (PSS) as the carrier. Due to the lack of key information affecting user experience (UX) such as target users’ persona, PSS scenarios, interaction sequence and modality, the traditional product concept information model cannot effectively support UX-centered PSS development activities. In this respect, first, the process of UX formation and its influencing factors were analyzed. Second, the object-oriented and semantic network methods were employed to characterize the meta-design information related to UX, a Meta scenario interaction-centered model was proposed. Then the seven layers structure scenario interaction-centered conceptual information model to support UX design of PSS was constructed. It incorporates the semantic network as its basis and is particularly suitable for characterizing dynamic Interactive behaviors. Finally, a prototype modeling system for user-oriented PSS design concept was developed based on Neo4j graph database and a sweeping robot PSS conceptual modeling case was introduced to analyze the application prospect of this model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.096

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 11

Metadata

Authors
Dong, Y., Zhu, R., Tian, Q., Liu, W., & Peng, W.
Affiliations
China Three Gorges University (CN)
Corresponding author
Dong, Yuanfa
Venue
Procedia CIRP
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019
Volume
83
Pages
335-338
ISSN
2212-8271 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2953395346
Cited by
11
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Procedia CIRP (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (51605255)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
product-service systems, user experience design, personas, interaction sequences, modality, semantic networks, object-oriented modeling, Neo4j graph database, sweeping robot, multisensory experience

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review