The PEW Framework for Worth Mapping

Abstract

Abstract. In Human Computer Interaction, it is more and more clear that usability is not enough. In order to take into account the other criteria that may be relevant for design, G. Cockton introduced the notion of "worth" and the Worth Centered Design (WCD) framework for its operationalization. The WCD framework structures the development process and provides designers with a set of tools, including Worth Maps (WMs).Worth maps connect systems attributes to human ones, and as such represent a promising tool. However, they remain understudied and under-experimented. This paper presents the results of our experience with WMs. More precisely, it proposes the PEW (Perceived and Expected Worth) framework for worth mapping, reports findings from a study conducted with 5 experts regarding many aspects of WMs, and discusses future directions for research.

Bringing Worth Maps a Step Further: A Dedicated Online-Resource

“…It is important to note that this participant has a technical background. Furthermore, if the work in [3] highlights WMs as a means to support software implementation, according to our data, none of the participants would rely on WMs during software implementation. However, the project manager insisted on the fact that WMs could be well suited for agile developments as a monitoring tool from one sprint to another.…”

“…The ARROW Framework ARROW (initially PEW [3]) was developed during the development of Cocoon, a mobile and context-aware application. The ARROW framework addresses worth as a twofold notion: 'Appreciated Worth' vs. 'Requested Worth' [2].…”

“…ARROW suggests full but also partial chains within WMs. If full chains make complete sense ((1), (2)), partial ones are more debatable since they assume that features with good qualities can contribute to worth even if they don't impact any HOE (i.e., (3), (4)) and that human-oriented elements can be directly impacted through features without intermediary qualities (i.e., (5), (6)).…”

Worth-Centered Design in Practice: Lessons from Experience and Research Agenda

“…Indeed, papers related to worth mapping only show examples of WMs that are different in terms of hierarchy levels and classes of worth elements [6,7,9,10,11,19]. To fulfill this need, we worked in collaboration with five experts involved in interactive system design (a project manager, a UI and interaction designer, a psychologist, a graphic designer, and a software engineer) and proposed the PEW (Perceived-Expected Worth) framework for supporting worth mapping [2]. This framework suggests that:…”