Personalityzation: UI Personalization, Theoretical Grounding in HCI and Design Research

Abstract

Abstract:Personalization is an effective means for accommodating differences between individuals. Therefore, the personalization of a system's user interface (UI) features can enhance usability. To date, UI personalization approaches have been largely divorced from psychological theories of personality, and the user profiles constructed by extant personalization techniques do not map directly onto the fundamental personality traits examined in the psychology literature. In line with recent calls to ground the design of information systems in behavioral theory, we maintain that personalization that is informed by psychology literature is advantageous. More specifically, we advocate an approach termed "personalityzation", where UI features are adapted to an explicit model of a user's personality. We demonstrate the proposed personalityzation approach through a proof-of-concept in the context of social recommender systems. We identify two key contributions to information systems research. First, extending prior works on adaptive interfaces, we introduce a UI personalization framework that is grounded in psychology theory of personality. Second, we reflect on how our proposed personalityzation framework could inform the discourse in design research regarding the theoretical grounding of system's design.

Recommender Systems for Personalized Gamification

“…A topic that has recently gained a ention is understanding how to personalize these gameful persuasive applications. Results have shown the higher value of personalized over generic approaches in user interface (UI) design [3,44], persuasive technologies [31,33], and games [5,14,50,53]. However, the study of personalized gami cation is still in its infancy and publications so far have been mostly theoretical, for example, focusing on identifying di erent personality traits or preferences for personalization [29,52,64].…”

How Do Learners Interact with E-learning? Examining Patterns of Learner Control Behaviors

“…One important direction for designing future online training programs concerns how to effectively use information about the learners to create an optimally effective learning interface (Kalyuga & Sweller, 2005;Orvis et al, 2011;Arazy et al, 2015). Given the weak relationships we found between learner control preferences and behaviors and the general findings in the literature that learner control does not always lead to improved performance, we cannot assume that learners will make effective choices on their own.…”

“…However, one pattern of behaviors we observed in this training was a group of trainees who simply used the control functions to skip through as much of the training as quickly as possible (i.e., the unengaged). Ideally, training designers could use information available about the trainees to present them with the optimal set of learner control tools (e.g., Arazy et al, 2015), which would prevent trainees from using learner controls to be unengaged. In other words, one could perhaps use the GOMS model (Card, Moran, & Newell, 1983) to individualize which specific sets of operational controls specific learners receive.…”

“…However, we lack a direct link between task analytic methods and learner motivation. That is, how specifically can training designers use task-specific behaviors to identify learners' current psychological states, and which states require the learning environment to adapt appropriately with more or less learner choice (Arazy et al, 2015)? We believe this area is ripe for future research.…”

“…They found that learners higher in openness and extraversion performed better in a training program that offered higher learner control, whereas those lower in these traits performed better with lower learner control. This type of research may allow avenues for personalizing user interfaces based on personality profiles, which Arazy, Nov, and Kumar (2015) call "personalityization".…”