Data collection

Based on the literature studies of user experience, this study gathered data mainly on the multiple aspects of user experience. They are: 1) user (expectations, motivation, and emotion); the usage context (e.g. physical and social environment) and the social interaction occurring at LSEs (e.g. social interaction); the culture (e.g. values), 2) user requirements at LSEs. This was done to provide an overview of what the current spectator experience was, what kinds of information resources were predominantly used, and the relevance to mobile personalization. It was also a means of capturing the types of information that the users were interested in, or were unable to access.

4.3.5 Analysis

Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyse the data. For qualitative data captured during field observation and interview, the affinity diagram technique (Hackos and Redish, 1998) was applied to group findings, based on their natural relationship, before sorting through them and analyzing which kind of requirements they represented. The process worked similarly to that described in Section 4.2.4.

For quantitative data, users‟ scores on the TAM-based questionnaire were analysed using statistical methods (Siegel and Castellan, 1988).

4.3.6 Results

The results of the studies were analysed from three viewpoints: 1) current user experience at LSEs;

2) user acceptance toward the concept of mobile personalization; 3) user requirements at LSEs

4.3.6.1 Current user experience at LSEs

Table 4.2 describes the multiple aspects of user experience observed during the four field studies, relating to: user, social, cultural, LSEs context and mobile product.

Table 4.2 User experience captured during studies and the methods used

Information overload. There was an overload of competition information which was

published/distributed in several ways, including audio, visual and paper „channels‟ at both football and swimming stadiums, consistent with Sun et al. (2005). The events were watched by spectators, but the significance of the events within the wider competition was often not known by the spectators until later. For example, users did not understand the meaning of the scores of one event of the swimming competition in relation to the overall scores of the event. Within the overall LSEs atmosphere, the detailed competition information can easily be lost, as also found by Nilsson et al. (2004). For example, some users missed the moment that a football player scored a goal.

The spectators were limited in their ability to select from a variety of different information sources (e.g. audio, visual and paper-based information in the stadiums), to assimilate the content and to control their interaction with information during the observed swimming and football events.

Social interaction. There was limited social interaction formed at the events.

Spectators were seldom involved in other activities besides quietly watching the competition, and they rarely directed their attention to social interaction. The social interaction happened infrequently and included asking questions, discussion among friends and cheering at peak sporting moments (e.g. scoring). It took place in a less explicit way with passers-by through the exchanging of glances. The experience itself was often dominated by long periods of watching in the sports stadiums, with the social interactions only comprising a small portion of the time spent actually watching the swimming and football events. An interesting finding was that Chinese spectators demonstrated their distinctive group image by wearing specific uniforms or using particular accessories (e.g. flags) when cheering in the stadiums. Interactions happened by taking pictures, talking to group members, or chanting group slogans during the climaxes of the studied events.

Use of mobile devices. The mobile devices, which were their own personal phones,

were inconvenient to use. In both swimming and football stadiums, it was not possible to perform complicated mobile tasks, except by simple clicking. For example, some

users struggled to take photographs using the mobile application while clapping their hands and cheering.

Personal activities. Personal activities were somewhat constrained in the sports

stadiums. For example, it was not easy to locate seats among the spectators, especially when arriving late in the swimming stadium; it took one and a half hours to watch the football matches, during which it was inconvenient to obtain refreshments because of the crowds in the stadium; after the events, crowds caused difficulties in meeting friends in the stadiums, as indicated by Olofsson et al. (2006).

4.3.6.2 User acceptance toward mobile personalization

To consider the availability of mobile personalization, the questionnaire based on TAM (Davis, 1986) was to provide an explanation of the determinants of user acceptance. The questionnaire, comprised of tailored measurement scales, was rated after the context interview. The measurement scales were on a 1-5 point range, and dialog boxes were included in the questionnaire to elicit user feedback regarding perceived usefulness, and attitudes toward using and intention behaviour.

The average acceptance score of all users was 4.52 in a 1~5 point scale. Consistent with literature research, Chinese users are very keen on mobile personalization (Cha et al. 2005; UPA, 2006). A summary diagram is given to show the mean user acceptance rating over all participants according to the user acceptance category. The ratings shown are aggregated scores on „strongly agree‟ (5) to „strongly disagree‟ (1) scales. The error bars represent +/- 1 standard deviation (SD) of the mean in all cases.

Figure 4.3 User acceptance rating toward the concept of mobile personalization at LSEs A Mann-Whitney test showed no significant difference for perceived ease of use (n=15, df= 17, Z= -.830, P= .489, P>.05), perceived usefulness (n=15, df=17, z=-.458, p=.730, P>.05), attitude toward using (n=15,df=17,z=-.458, p=.724, P>.05) , intention behavior (n=15, df =17, z=-.255, p=.86, P>.05) between the two persona groups. Based on users‟ comments, users showed high levels of acceptance toward the concept of mobile personalization at LSEs. Although there was no significant difference in acceptance categories between the two groups of users, the first user group (sports lover) underlined the importance of less interaction which required providing related information/services on demand with minimum attention at LSEs. On the other hand, the second user group which enjoys social communication, placed emphasis on relevance, which demanded the enhanced social interaction tailored to users‟ interest and preference in a stadium and the presentation of relevant event information/services.

4.3.6.3 User requirements of mobile personalization at LSEs

The studies also generated a list of 55 requirements that were further reduced to 46 core requirements by combining related issues, which were later divided into 4 groups of user requirements: functional requirements, information, social, and usability requirements. A detailed description is provided below.

Priority was set to required, important or less important. The condition was set as required when 50% or more users asked for it, as important when 25%-49% of users asked for it and others were ranked as less important requirements.

Functional requirement. Personalization should provide information/services in line

with the event context, such as updated information/services according to the event progress. It should also provide location-sensitive event broadcasts, replays and notification of competition times on the mobile application.

Table 4.3 Functional requirements

Required event broadcast; event replay; provide information/services according to relevant context; notification of competition time

Important order food; different viewing angles; professional analysis; buy tickets; reminders before events; guidance to seats in the stadium; bet and predict before events; video chat; make a picture-diary; block redundant information; play music via the mobile application

Less important provide advanced gaming; send messages to a group; automatically find friends; translate different languages; chatting system like MSN; estimate of the time to go to the stadium

Information requirement. It should supply personalized information on athletes, event

schedules, results and event background information (such as competition rules). Table 4.4 Information requirements

Required personalized information on athletes, event schedules, event results and event background information, such as competition rules

Important personalized information on tickets, entertainment, and traffic; location of food, toilets, emergency exits, police, ATMs, supporters’ products such as flags, etc; event news

Less important Rank of matches and players; number of available and sold tickets; number of fans of different players; weather information

Social requirement. It should support social interaction by building up virtual

communities, especially enhancing interactions within/with groups of people who share something in common, such as discussing and sharing experiences.

Table 4.5 Social requirements

Required build up a\virtual community with people sharing something in common; share experience in groups; discuss with groups of users

Important locate friends; make recommendations to friends; get celebration information after events; share pictures with friends

Less important find new friends during matches; support the feeling of not being alone in the stadium

Usability requirement. Information/services should be timely and relevant, and

personalized to users‟ context. Interaction with the application should be intuitive and simple, allowing easy interaction and minimizing a user‟s commitment and saving their time. Information/services presented should cater for user needs at different times and support different activities.

Table 4.6 Usability requirements

Required present timely, relevant, event information; provide context for information and services which makes information useful; be easy, quick to interact with

Important easy to carry

Less important easy to remember the control keys