The role of cognitive dissonance for QoE evaluation of multimedia services

Sackl, Andreas; Zwickl, Patrick; Egger, Sebastian; Reichl, Peter

doi:10.1109/glocomw.2012.6477779

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Explanations of this labeling effect phenomenon also refer to prior knowledge and experience, which we explicitly include through LoC. They also analyzed how active user decisions affect evaluation [13] via cognitive dissonance. The presence of active financial decision boosted the acceptance rate and mean perceived quality of the streaming videos.…”

Section: Prior Researches and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing is Believing and Vice Versa: Investigation of the Altered Perception during Subjective Assessment of Streaming Multimedia

Kara

Bokor

Imre

2014

2014 Tenth International Conference on Signal-Image Technology and Internet-Based Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of Experience is one of the most important components in the definition of service value. The primary role of the subjective evaluation of multimedia service quality is to reflect the true satisfactory of users. However, these reflections may not carry the desired level of accuracy under specific circumstances. This paper presents how basic information regarding the service not only distorts mean QoE results, but also manipulates perception itself. The research utilized 7 different measurement scales for subjective assessment of the perceived quality. A total of 90 participants evaluated the streaming multimedia, but while 30 performed blind tests, a group of 60 were given minimal information regarding the type of connection and transmission security. The results contain the scoring patterns of the participants and also our findings on the expressive power of scales.

show abstract

Section: Prior Researches and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing is Believing and Vice Versa: Investigation of the Altered Perception during Subjective Assessment of Streaming Multimedia

Kara

Bokor

Imre

2014

2014 Tenth International Conference on Signal-Image Technology and Internet-Based Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thereby, user behavior, e.g., interactions with the application when facing QoE degradations, is a result of (post-)conscious or affective processes that follow on the perception and the quality formation, and can affect the perceived stimulus. [11] observed that QoE can be inferred from monitoring user behavior, while [12] showed that QoE could be altered by user behavior following the consistency principle or cognitive dissonance. The QoE cycle is depicted in Figure 2, which shows again an Internet service (orange) seen from different layers (vertical separation) and stakeholders (horizontal separation), similar to Figure 1.…”

Section: Quality Of Experience Cyclementioning

confidence: 99%

Considering User Behavior in the Quality of Experience Cycle: Towards Proactive QoE-Aware Traffic Management

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of Quality of Experience (QoE) of Internet services is widely recognized by service providers and network operators. They strive to deliver the best experience to their customers in order to increase revenues and avoid churn. Therefore, QoE is increasingly considered as an integral part of the reactive traffic management cycle of network operators. Additionally, QoE also constitutes a cycle of its own, which includes the user behavior and the service requirements. This work describes this QoE cycle, which is not widely taken into account yet, discusses the interactions of the two cycles, and derives implications towards an improved and proactive QoE-aware traffic management. A showcase on how network operators can obtain hints on the change of network requirements from detecting user behavior in encrypted video traffic is also presented in this paper.

show abstract

“…In the contributions of Sackl et al [51,52] and Kara et al [53,54], the label was the type of connection. In both researches, perceived quality was measured in a mock-up scenario, where the performance of wireless and wireline connection did not differ at all.…”

Section: Qoe and Other Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of HD and UHD video quality with and without the influence of the labeling effect

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past decades have shown a steady rise in the pixel resolution of digital visualization technologies. New TVs and computer displays available on the consumer market are commonly UHD/4K, and 8K recently started appearing in the commercial world. The added value of such higher resolution is not only indicated by the purported level of visual performance, but also by the labels that emphasize the devices' properties, especially the resolution. However, the genuinely perceived difference between two resolutions, such as HD and UHD, may not have the same effect on user experience as the labels attached to the devices or sequences themselves. In this paper we present four subjective studies in which we investigated the influence of the labeling effect in the context of HD and UHD video. Subjects were shown pairs of either HD or UHD video sequences and had to determine whether there was a difference in quality between the sequences. Two of the subjective tests involved labels in these paired comparisons, indicating to the subject which sequence was which, while the other two tests excluded these labels. For both test sets with and without labels, one test used a 3-point comparison scale for the subjective assessment of visual quality, while the other used a more fine-grained 7-point scale. Our findings show that the sole inclusion of quality labels can strongly impact subjective rating behavior and the overall opinion on UHD quality; also, visual differences between HD and UHD video were rarely noticeable by the subjects. Standards and recommendationsAs with most technologies finding widespread use among the consumers, there are standards that govern how a technology is to be developed, evaluated, and integrated with other technologies. Standards or international recommendations are provided for that interoperability. Among the most relevant international standards on the topic of UHD are documents from the International Telecommunication Union's telecommunication and broadcasting sectors (ITU-T and ITU-R).While ITU-R Rec. BT.709 addresses HDTV (i.e., TV up to 1080p resolution), Rec. BT.2020 [3] covers UHD and the corresponding specifications of dynamic range, color gamut and primaries, bit depths, frame rates, and pixel resolutions. Additional recommendations include Rec. BT.1769 which specifies parameter values for large screen digital imagery and how to design a system that gives viewers visual experiences of a high-sensation of reality-which UHD was also developed for.Subjective quality assessment tests are typically carried out in a rigorous fashion: users are placed in a dedicated testing room with specific lighting conditions and a certain viewing distance to the screen. Guidelines in ITU-T Recommendations P.910, P.911, and P.913 as well as ITU-R Rec. BT.500-13 may be applied in those tests. When subjectively evaluating the quality of UHD systems, the aspect of viewing distance plays a crucial role. Typically, for HDTV applications, human testers are seated at a distance of about 3 H to the TV, where H is the ...

show abstract

The role of cognitive dissonance for QoE evaluation of multimedia services

Cited by 26 publications

References 10 publications

Seeing is Believing and Vice Versa: Investigation of the Altered Perception during Subjective Assessment of Streaming Multimedia

Seeing is Believing and Vice Versa: Investigation of the Altered Perception during Subjective Assessment of Streaming Multimedia

Considering User Behavior in the Quality of Experience Cycle: Towards Proactive QoE-Aware Traffic Management

Comparison of HD and UHD video quality with and without the influence of the labeling effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About