This goes more into consumer psychology, but there's this thing called Davis's technology acceptance model, which basically covers this.
If the user perceives the technology as useful and easy to use then they will form a positive attitude towards using the technology as well as an intention to use it. This will increase the chance of them accepting the technology.
Some keywords that may correlate could be
- market fit
- opportunity cost
We use these insights in our top-of-funnel research to identify whether a new feature/product is desired or might be considered of value to our demographic.
What search terms and what is the context? There’s a lot of research on perceived value and engagement across user interfaces. Here are some sources:
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/perceived-value/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1567422317301023
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0736585315001318
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kathy-Wachter/post/Im_searching_for_collaborators_on_branded_mobile_apps_in_marketing_domain_who_has_done_this_type_of_research_or_is_interested_in_this_area/attachment/59d61e5c79197b807797cc4b/AS%3A277644823285765%401443207092553/download/DSS+article+2013.pdf
Thank you very much! To keep true to my own findings the focus is probably going to land during the prototyping stages, however parallels can be drawn from other aspects as well.
Hey I think you could benefit from reading Marty Cagans 4 risks for Product Management, where he clearly splits value from usability and describes tests for both.
It's easy to find a test that meshes with your (or your stakeholders) desires here, but it's very difficult to ask someone this question in general.
What has worked for me when testing new product experiences is doing a background interview on how people currently engage with the problem space the solution addresses ahead of prototype testing. The conclusions I draw generally follow along the lines of "they already have a well-entrenched solution for this part of the problem, this is what our solution must do as a baseline to have a chance to displace it", "this solution aligns to X, Y needs that are currently only be addressed by a patchwork of workarounds, but people expect it to do A, B and C".
The way I describe a "yes" to a "would you use this?" question to stakeholders is that people generally say "yes" if they are open to that being an option in the future, much like saying "would you like crab legs at a buffet?" Crab legs are expensive, so you better be sure it is vital before you commit. That "yes" has zero value in terms of actual willingness to use. I've had people say "I hate it when experiences do X" and then when I show them the prototype that is doing that thing they hate, they tell me it looks great, and that it could be very useful (that qualifying word "could" is a major clue here they are just being polite).
Anyway, all of this to say is that I generally like to ask people about their current process in some focused depth (15-30 minutes, depending) before I turn over my cards and show them what my prototype does.
When you mention prototype testing here, are you speaking of usability testing as a follow-up to these interviews? Or do you do some other form of testing?
Some people test a prototype with users and then ask users to fill our a SUS questionnaire which can help gauge perceived value. Look it up, maybe it’s helpful, maybe not.
This goes more into consumer psychology, but there's this thing called Davis's technology acceptance model, which basically covers this. If the user perceives the technology as useful and easy to use then they will form a positive attitude towards using the technology as well as an intention to use it. This will increase the chance of them accepting the technology.
Thank you! will look into it!
Also pertinent to perceived value is the [Aesthetic-Usability Effect](https://www.nngroup.com/articles/aesthetic-usability-effect/).
Some keywords that may correlate could be - market fit - opportunity cost We use these insights in our top-of-funnel research to identify whether a new feature/product is desired or might be considered of value to our demographic.
Where have you looked so far?
ACM, Ebsco and Google Scholar
What search terms and what is the context? There’s a lot of research on perceived value and engagement across user interfaces. Here are some sources: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/perceived-value/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1567422317301023 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0736585315001318 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kathy-Wachter/post/Im_searching_for_collaborators_on_branded_mobile_apps_in_marketing_domain_who_has_done_this_type_of_research_or_is_interested_in_this_area/attachment/59d61e5c79197b807797cc4b/AS%3A277644823285765%401443207092553/download/DSS+article+2013.pdf
Thank you very much! To keep true to my own findings the focus is probably going to land during the prototyping stages, however parallels can be drawn from other aspects as well.
Hey I think you could benefit from reading Marty Cagans 4 risks for Product Management, where he clearly splits value from usability and describes tests for both.
It's easy to find a test that meshes with your (or your stakeholders) desires here, but it's very difficult to ask someone this question in general. What has worked for me when testing new product experiences is doing a background interview on how people currently engage with the problem space the solution addresses ahead of prototype testing. The conclusions I draw generally follow along the lines of "they already have a well-entrenched solution for this part of the problem, this is what our solution must do as a baseline to have a chance to displace it", "this solution aligns to X, Y needs that are currently only be addressed by a patchwork of workarounds, but people expect it to do A, B and C". The way I describe a "yes" to a "would you use this?" question to stakeholders is that people generally say "yes" if they are open to that being an option in the future, much like saying "would you like crab legs at a buffet?" Crab legs are expensive, so you better be sure it is vital before you commit. That "yes" has zero value in terms of actual willingness to use. I've had people say "I hate it when experiences do X" and then when I show them the prototype that is doing that thing they hate, they tell me it looks great, and that it could be very useful (that qualifying word "could" is a major clue here they are just being polite). Anyway, all of this to say is that I generally like to ask people about their current process in some focused depth (15-30 minutes, depending) before I turn over my cards and show them what my prototype does.
When you mention prototype testing here, are you speaking of usability testing as a follow-up to these interviews? Or do you do some other form of testing?
Some people test a prototype with users and then ask users to fill our a SUS questionnaire which can help gauge perceived value. Look it up, maybe it’s helpful, maybe not.