Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16Usability and User Interface DesignInnovative Human-Technology InteractionEmotion and Mood Recognition

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 92 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Do You Feel the Same? On the Robustness of Cued-Recall Debriefing for User Experience Evaluation

Bruun, Anders, Law, Effie Lai-Chong, Nielsen, Thomas Dyhre, Heintz, Matthias·2021·ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
DOI 10.1145/3453479
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Cued Recall Debriefing (CRD) is a form of retrospective think aloud approach. It involves re-immersing users to a level where emotional responses are comparable to those experienced during actual interaction with a system. To validate whether the robustness of CRD would vary with the time gap between the actual and recalled event and with the affective state preceding the recall, two empirical studies with altogether 100 participants were conducted. Specifically, participants’ emotions were measured in terms of galvanic skin response (GSR) , heart rate (HR) , and self-assessment manikin (SAM) rating when they were interacting with an email client seeded with usability problems. The same measures were taken when they viewed the videoed interactions. Two between-subject variables were ‘intervening time’ (from 0 minutes up to 24 hours) and ‘intervening affect’ (images with different valence and arousal). Advanced computational models were applied to optimise the shifting of GSR/HR waves generated at the actual interaction and recall phases, which were found to be significantly correlated. The shifting process is necessary for addressing the memory effect and is a methodological innovation. Overall, CRD proved to be a robust method that can be deployed to a broad range of HCI research and practice contexts.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3453479

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 92 references

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. John R. Anderson and Gordon H . Bower . 1979 . Human associative memory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , Hillsdale, NJ. John R. Anderson and Gordon H. Bower. 1979. Human associative memory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
  2. Todd Bentley , Lorraine Johnston , and Karola von Baggo . 2005 . Evaluation using cued-recall debrief to elicit information about a user's affective experiences . In Proceedings of the 2005 Australasian Computer-Human Interaction Conference (OZCHI’05) . 1–10. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1108368.1108403. Todd Bentley, Lorraine Johnston, and Karola von Baggo. 2005. Evaluation using cued-recall debrief to elicit information about a user's affective experiences. In Proceedings of the 2005 Australasian Computer-Human Interaction Conference (OZCHI’05). 1–10. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1108368.1108403.
  3. Gordon H. Bower and Joseph P . Forgas . 2000 . Affect, memory, and social cognition. In Cognition and Emotion. Oxford University Press , 87–168. Gordon H. Bower and Joseph P. Forgas. 2000. Affect, memory, and social cognition. In Cognition and Emotion. Oxford University Press, 87–168.
  4. V. A. Bowers and H. L. Snyder . 1990. Concurrent versus retrospective verbal protocols for comparing window usability . In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Meeting. 1270–1274 . V. A. Bowers and H. L. Snyder. 1990. Concurrent versus retrospective verbal protocols for comparing window usability. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Meeting. 1270–1274.
  5. Jason J. Braithwaite and Derrick G . Watson . 2015 . Issues Surrounding the Normalization and Standardisation of Skin Conductance Responses (SCRs). Birmingham . Jason J. Braithwaite and Derrick G. Watson. 2015. Issues Surrounding the Normalization and Standardisation of Skin Conductance Responses (SCRs). Birmingham.
  6. 10.5555/1531294.1531312 · doi:10.5555/1531294.1531312
  7. Eva Ganglbauer , Stephanie Deutsch , and Manfred Tscheligi . 2009 . Applying psychophysiological methods for measuring user experience: Possibilities, challenges and feasibility . In Proceedings of the User Experience Evaluation Methods in Product Development (UXEM’09) . DOI:https://doi.org/10.1.1.189.3410 Eva Ganglbauer, Stephanie Deutsch, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2009. Applying psychophysiological methods for measuring user experience: Possibilities, challenges and feasibility. In Proceedings of the User Experience Evaluation Methods in Product Development (UXEM’09). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1.1.189.3410
  8. Caroll E. Izard . 1993. Organizational and motivational functions of discrete emotions . In Handbook of emotions . Guilford Press , New York, NY , 631–641. Caroll E. Izard. 1993. Organizational and motivational functions of discrete emotions. In Handbook of emotions. Guilford Press, New York, NY, 631–641.
  9. 10.2307/40062570 · doi:10.2307/40062570
  10. Liadh Kelly and Gareth J. F. Jones . 2010. An exploration of the utility of GSR in locating events from personal lifelogs for reflection . In Proceedings of the 4th Irish Human Computer Interaction Conference (iHCI’10) . Retrieved September 21, 2018 from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Exploration-of-the-Utility-of-GSR-in-Locating-Kelly/12e73eb02d357ee0085465d0cff6aa322e19e515. Liadh Kelly and Gareth J. F. Jones. 2010. An exploration of the utility of GSR in locating events from personal lifelogs for reflection. In Proceedings of the 4th Irish Human Computer Interaction Conference (iHCI’10). Retrieved September 21, 2018 from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Exploration-of-the-Utility-of-GSR-in-Locating-Kelly/12e73eb02d357ee0085465d0cff6aa322e19e515.
  11. 10.1037/0003-066x.50.5.372 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Clayton Lewis . 1982. Using the “Thinking-Aloud ” Method in Cognitive Interface Design . IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights , NY. Retrieved June 19, 2019 from https://www.worldcat.org/title/using-the-thinking-aloud-method-in-cognitive-interface-design/oclc/38214134. Clayton Lewis. 1982. Using the “Thinking-Aloud” Method in Cognitive Interface Design. IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY. Retrieved June 19, 2019 from https://www.worldcat.org/title/using-the-thinking-aloud-method-in-cognitive-interface-design/oclc/38214134.
  13. Brendan D. Murray , Alisha C. Holland , and Elisabeth A . Kensinger . 2013 . Episodic memory and emotion. In Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. M. D. Robinson, E. R. Watkins, and E. Harmon-Jones (Eds.), Guilford Press , 156–175. Brendan D. Murray, Alisha C. Holland, and Elisabeth A. Kensinger. 2013. Episodic memory and emotion. In Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. M. D. Robinson, E. R. Watkins, and E. Harmon-Jones (Eds.), Guilford Press, 156–175.
  14. K. N. Ochsner . 2000 . Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. Journal of Experimental Psychology . General 129 , 2 (2000), 242 – 261 . K. N. Ochsner. 2000. Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 129, 2 (2000), 242–261.
  15. Jenny Preece , Yvonne Rogers , and Helen Sharp . 2019 . Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. Retrieved May 2, 2019 from https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Interaction+Design%3A+Beyond+Human+Computer+Interaction%2C+4th+Edition-p-9781119020752. Jenny Preece, Yvonne Rogers, and Helen Sharp. 2019. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. Retrieved May 2, 2019 from https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Interaction+Design%3A+Beyond+Human+Computer+Interaction%2C+4th+Edition-p-9781119020752.
  16. 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1670 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1093/iwc · doi:10.1093/iwc

Cited by

See all 16

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bruun, A., Law, E. L.-C., Nielsen, T. D., & Heintz, M.
Affiliations
  • Aalborg University (DK)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
ORCID
Venue
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2021-07-23
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
1-45
ISSN
  • 1073-0516 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7325
DOI
10.1145/3453479
OpenAlex
W3185232422
Cited by
16
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (publishedVersion)
  • VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
retrospective think-aloud, user experience evaluation, emotional responses, memory effects, skin conductance, heart rate, Self-Assessment Manikin

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do You Feel the Same? On the Robustness of Cued-Recall Debriefing for User Experience Evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/3453479
The paper
Bruun, A., Law, E. L.-C., Nielsen, T. D., & Heintz, M. (2021). Do You Feel the Same? On the Robustness of Cued-Recall Debriefing for User Experience Evaluation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/3453479

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.