Promoter: Prof. Dr. Ir. Erik Duval Mentor: Sven Charleer Niels Delestinne MSc in Applied Informatics nielsdelestinne.wordpress.com “Second screen” application for nature documentaries 26/11/2014
Jul 08, 2015
Promoter:
Prof. Dr. Ir. Erik Duval
Mentor:
Sven Charleer
Niels DelestinneMSc in Applied Informatics
nielsdelestinne.wordpress.com
“Second screen”
application for
nature
documentaries
26/11/2014
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
44% of smartphone
and tablet owners
uses their device
daily when
watching TV. [2]
Situating1,4 billion
smartphone
s worldwide [1]
7,7 billion
mobile
devices in
use. [1]
TV and Mobile devices
A Second screen stands for the use of anadditional screen, commonly a smartphoneor tablet while watching television.
TV no longer commands the full attention of its viewers. [3]
Opportunities
[1]: Penny Stocks Lab (2014).[2]: Nielsen Company (2013). Action figures: How second screen are transforming TV.[3]: Anna Van Cauwenberge, Gabi Schaap, Rob van Roy (2014). "TV no longer commands our full attention”
Second screen applications
A lot of second screen applications exist thecurrent day.
Situating
Story-map : for story-driven series.
De Ridder: be part of the team and help solve the cases.
HomeCoach: engage with other viewers of The Voice.
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
Specific research question?
So how will we concretely examine this, what will be the research question / problem definition?
With this thesis we investigate whether users can gain added value by using a second screen application when watching a nature documentary on TV.
Design, develop and evaluate the impact on the user of (a) second screen application(s).
Goal of this thesis
Research Question
A lot of time went into finding the right research question. Although the foundationsare in place, a single research question is not yet pinned down.
“The optimization of the representation, interaction and automatisation of second screen applications for nature documentaries.”
“How to manage the attention, the interest and interaction of the user of a second screen application for nature documentaries.”
Goal of this thesis
“The optimization of the user experience of a second screen companion application for nature documentaries.”
“Finding the right amount, presentation and type of content to show to users of second screen applications for nature documentaries.”
“In search of design guidelines for second screen applications used with nature documentaries.”
“Interactivity and concentration: the optimal balance in second screen applications for nature documentaries.”
Feedback is greatly appreciated!
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
Get orientated!
• What research has already been conducted?• What were the conclusions?• What are the remaining questions? (starting
points for new research)
Literature study
Focus of research
Almost all related research is focused on story-driven or live TV shows.
Literature study
Social media: interaction between the viewers, related to what they’re watching. “social engagement”. [1]
Viewer participation: let the viewer have some sort of influence, make him part of the TV program.
Additional Information: provide the viewer with extra, related information. [2]
Semi-Automatisation: reduce the editorial work that comes with second screen application. [3]
Cognitive load: What amount of attention should / do second screen applications demand? [4]
Usage of second screen: How do viewers use their second screen (application) while watching TV? [5]
[1] Mark Doughty et al. (2012). Who is on your sofa? TV audience communities and second screening social networks[2] Janet H. Murray et al. (2014). Story-map: iPad companion for long form TV narratives.[3] Daniel Stein et al. (2012). Semi-automatic video analysis for linking television to the web.[4] Anna Van Cauwenberge et al. (2014). "TV no longer commands our full attention”[5] Andy Brown et al. (2014). HCI over multiple screens.
Interesting ‘future work’ advice
Literature study
“… Researchers may want to focus on how to integrate first and second-screen information – both in terms of content and format – so that depletion of cognitive sources is put to a minimal …” [1]
“… With regard to program genres, program-related second-screen applications should avoid movies, drama and documentaries that require viewers full attention
…” [2]
“… Insights into users’ general frequency of switching attention and durations of focused attention … could form the basis of design patterns and other guidance for experienced designers in this domain …“ [3]
[1] Anna Van Cauwenberge et al. (2014). "TV no longer commands our full attention”[2] Jeroen Vanattenhoven et al. – Centre for User Experience Research KUL (2011). Who is on your sofa? TV audience communities and second screening social networks[3] Andy Brown et al. (2014). HCI over multiple screens.
Second screen and nature documentaries
Very little research and focus on second screen applications for nature documentaries.
Experiment by BBC Research & Development which is very relevant to my thesis. Some questions have been solved in the experiment, but a lot of them remain open.
[1] BBC Research & development (2011). The Autumnwatch TV Companion experiment
Literature study
Autumnwatch: companion app for the BBC nature program Autumnwatch. [1]
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype
• Started out with sketches on paper.
Progress
First prototype: Evaluation
• Decision to remake thesketches in Photoshop was made, making the sketches visually more inviting.
Progress
First prototype: Evaluation
• In an effort to make the evaluation a more realistic experience for the participants, InVision was used.
• Buttons• Swipe & Touch• Timed screen changes• View on Tablet
• For the same reason, GIF animations were added.
Progress
First prototype: Evaluation results
Participants were asked to watch 10 minutes of Planet Earth Episode 9 while using an Android tableton which the prototype was active.
5 participants: ranging from 20 to 23 years old.
Average SUS of 73: the lowest being 60, the highest 87,5
Progress
Progress
First prototype: Evaluation results
Some of the conclusions and interpretations of the first evaluation were the following:
• More interactivity is required.• Rather distracting.• Rewatching information-blocks is useful.• When to watch to the TV, when to second-screen is
difficult.• Easy to use.
Second prototype, digital prototype
• Native Android application• Few elements hard coded• Data dynamically loaded and displayed from
database• Companion application for Planet Earth (series)
Progress
Second prototype, digital prototype
Core functionalities
• Synchronization with a Planet Earth episode.• Receive information-blocks while watching an
episode.• Navigate between the already received
information-blocks• Image, Fact, Map & Quiz information-blocks• Rewatch information-blocks from previously
watched episodes.• Visually styled
Progress
Second prototype, digital prototype:Evaluation
A scenario consisting out of 26 steps was created and used during the evaluation.
Progress
Participants were asked to perform certain tasks in order to determine some aspects of the usability of the prototype.
Afterwards, participants were asked to watch 11minutes of Planet Earth Episode 10 while using an Android tablet on which the prototype was active.
Second prototype, digital
prototype: Evaluation results
The Main goal of this evaluation was to check
the usability, usefulness and aesthetic
qualities of the prototype.
5 participants: ranging from 20
to 56 years old.
Average SUS of 82,5 the lowest
being 77,5 the highest 92,5
Progress
7382.5
0
100
AVG SUSPROTOTYPE 1
AVG SUSPROTOTYPE 2
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
Stated below are the main difficulties I had while
working on the thesis during the past 2 months.
Difficulties
Research Question: Finding the
right research question has and still
is a difficulty I’m facing.
Limitations of nature
documentaries: More possibilities
for other formats
than for nature documentaries.
Android: Programming (and
especially fixing the layout) for
Android is time consuming.
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
27 JAN –11 FEB
10 JAN –27 JAN
End of DEC - 10
JAN
Now - end of DEC
Start creating prototype
V4. Continue writing
literature study.
Preparing prototype V3
for evaluation and
evaluating it.
Studying for finals.Finalizing research
question. Extending /
modifying the digital
prototype and by doing so
creating a new version
(V3) that can be
evaluated.
Planning
23 MAR – 22 MAY
23 MAR2 MAR –22 MAR
12 FEB –1 MAR
Complete writing thesis
text. (and if time) Creating
prototype V5 and
evaluating it.
Creating prototype V4
and evaluating it.
Finish up literate study,
start with writing
remaining thesis text.
Second presentationTrip to China! (Checked in
advance with my mentor if
this was okay.)
END OF JUN6 JUN22 MAY
Hand in thesis. Defending the thesis.Hand in draft of thesis
text.
1. Situating
2. Goal of this thesis
3. Literature study
4. Progress
5. Difficulties
6. Planning
7. Statistics
Table of contents
Blog posts created.
Reactions made, of which
18 on my own blog.
Statistics
The Wordpress statistics
16
39
Hours worked, and
counting.
Statistics
The Toggl statistics
Very accurately tracked the time
57 hours went into the implementation of the
digital prototype.
142
• 29th Sep - 5th Oct4 h 30 min
• 06 - 12 October15 h 35 min
• 13 - 19 October15 h 38 min
• 20 - 26 October18 h 44 min
• 27th Oct - 2nd Nov11 h 25 min
• 03 - 09 November22 h 36 min
• 10 - 16 November22 h 23 min
• Last week21 h 17 min
• This week9 h 33 min (and counting)
Papers skimmed.
Papers read.
Statistics
The TiNYARM statistics
7
17
Expected
score:15/20
Demo
Questions?