A Method for Evaluating Animal Usability (MEAU)

Abstract

Animal Computer Interaction, aims to design user centered interactions that result in good user experiences (UX). During evaluation, the quality of the UX is assessed by measuring the degree to which the interaction between the user and the artefact meets the users' needs and preferences, as evidenced by their behavior. A key measure of the UX is usability. When evaluating usability for different species, ACI researchers face two major challenges: the differences in cognitive, physical and sensory capabilities between human evaluators and animal users, with the implications these differences have for assessing the users' behavior; and the human-centric focus of most usability evaluation methods currently available. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a Method for Evaluating Animal Usability (MEAU), here tailored to Mobility Assistance Dogs as the users, and illustrates its application during a study that compared the canine usability of different access controls.

An Ethics Toolkit to Support Animal-Centered Research and Design

“…However, most of the environments and the artifacts the dogs are required to interact with are designed from a human-centered perspective that fails to recognize MADs as legitimate users and therefore fails to meet their usability needs ( 4 ). Failing to meet MADs' usability needs does not usually prevent them from being able to assist their partners but it does result in them facing significant challenges that impact their training and working performance, and that ultimately affect their welfare ( 4 ) and their experience as technology users, i.e., their user experience ( 14 ).…”

MeowPlayLive: Enhancing Animal Live Streaming Experience Through Voice Message-Based Real-Time Viewer-Animal Interaction

“…For example, Choe [18] investigates the conversational patterns of live stream viewers in the context of cat mukbang (live streams of cats eating food) and how the viewers interact with one another in the real-time chat. In humananimal interaction, the technology should fully take the animal's physiological, cognitive, and sensory traits into account, as well as translate the input from the human into a form of feedback that the animal can perceive and vice versa [50,54].…”

Survey on the Past Decade of Technology in Animal Enrichment: A Scoping Review

“…This prominence of mammalian enrichment has been seen in other reviews as well, particularly in zoo contexts [ 2 ]. In this group, primates [ 3 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ] and carnivores [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 31 , 39 , 40 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 ,...…”

“…Companion animal enrichment (shown in Table 4 ) has a large potential for financial growth, with a new awareness being given to pet care. Studies in this area of motivated by a species-specific approach [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 56 , 58 ], fostering animal–human interaction [ 22 , 23 , 25 , 54 ], welfare [ 21 , 25 , 57 ], and standardizing evaluation methods [ 55 ]. Enrichment examined in this area focuses on visual displays [ 22 , 23 , 54 , 56 ], with auditory cues [ 21 , 58 ] and objects [ 21 , 55 ] moderately used, and solely animal–human interaction [ 25 ] also explored.…”