Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management

Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management

A Conceptual Model of User Experience in Human–Computer Interaction Using Thematic Analysis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Kaveh Tebyani 1
Vahid Choopankareh 2
Ebrahim Bagheri Taleghani 3
1 Ph.D Candidate, Department of industrial Design, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Design, University of Tehran
3 assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Design, College of applied Arts, Iran university of art , Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/jipm.2025.2051099.1911
Abstract
The usage of the Internet and increasing human-object interaction has made user experience relevant and an important aspect of the industrial design discipline. User experience is considered to be at the heart of any product, digital service, and online platform acceptance or rejection, which is indeed well-documented and recognized by researchers in this area. With all the research done concerning user experience, there is still a lack of a thorough definition that may delineate its nature and spot the influencing factors. This knowledge gap underlines the need for in-depth analysis of the components of user experience with a view to clearly spelling out what this concept is.
This paper will, therefore, seek to fill this gap by establishing the major dimensions of the user experience and developing a clear conceptual model based on the application of the principles of fundamental research. The paper uses a library-based research methodology in collecting and analyzing data through the use of thematic analysis and a six-stage process. Synthesis of the resulting themes led to a conceptual framework that described the user experience construct in the context of human-computer interaction.
With the increasing use of the internet and the widespread expansion of human–computer interaction across various products and artifacts, the concept of user experience (UX) is gaining more prominence in this field. The influence of UX on the acceptance of products and digital/online services is well-recognized and confirmed by experts in the domain. However, despite numerous efforts and studies on user experience, the research literature in the field of human–computer interaction still lacks a comprehensive and reliable framework that clearly defines the nature of UX and identifies its influencing components. The present study aims to identify the key components of user experience and to provide a clear conceptualization of this phenomenon through thematic analysis. Accordingly, the research is categorized as fundamental in nature and employs an analytical approach applied to qualitative data. To conduct this study, the thematic analysis method was employed. This method analyses research data across six structured phases. Data were collected through a library-based approach from reputable academic sources. The data analysis followed the standard phases of thematic analysis, and the coding process was conducted in two stages. Finally, the extracted themes were categorized and defined. The findings of this study include a conceptual framework for user experience in the domain of human–computer interaction and the defining and constitutive elements of UX. These constitutive elements, along with their descriptive features—considered the intrinsic properties of UX—form a multidimensional concept comprising three levels (aesthetic, emotional, and semantic) and three types (ergonomic, affective, and cognitive).
Keywords
User Experience, Human&ndash
Computer Interaction, UX Conceptual Framework, UX Design
Subjects
References:
Ariza, N., & J. Maya. 2014. Proposal to identify the essential elements to construct a user experience model with the product using the thematic analysis technique. In DS 77: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 13th International Design Conference (pp. 11-22). Dubrovnik - Cavtat – Croatia.
Aslam, A., & I. A. Rana. 2022. The use of local climate zones in the urban environment: A systematic review of data sources, methods, and themes. Urban Climate 42: 101120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101120
Basri, N. H., N. L. M. Noor, W. A. W., Adnan, F. M. Saman & A. H. A. Baharin. 2016. Conceptualizing and understanding user experience. In 2016 4th International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr) (pp. 81-84). IEEE. DOI:10.1109/IUSER.2016.7857938
Beatty, P. T. 1981. The concept of need: Proposal for a working definition. Journal of the Community Development Society 12 (2): 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.1981.9987132
Bergner, R. M. 2020. What is personality? Two myths and a definition. New Ideas in Psychology, 57, 100759. DOI:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2019.100759
Berni, A., & Y. Borgianni. 2021a. From the definition of user experience to a framework to classify its applications in design. Proceedings of the Design Society, 1, 1627-1636. DOI:10.1017/pds.2021.424
_____. 2021b. Making order in user experience research to support its application in design and beyond. Applied Sciences 11 (15): 6981. DOI:10.3390/app11156981
_____, D. Basso, & C. C. Carbon. 2023. Fundamentals and issues of user experience in the process of designing consumer products. Design Science 9: e10. DOI:10.1017/dsj.2023.8
Boy, G. A. 2017. The Handbook of Human-Machine Interaction: A Human-Centered Design Approach (1st ed.). Milton: CRC Press. ISBN 9781138075825
Boyatzis, R.E. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. ISBN-10: 0761909613
Braun, V., & V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3 (2), 77-101. DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Broussard, S. C., & M. E. B. Garrison. 2004. The relationship between classroom motivationacademic achievement in elementary school-aged children. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 33 (2): 106–120. DOI:10.1177/1077727X04269573
Desmet, P. M. A. 2002. Designing emotions. Delft: Delft University of Technology.
_____, & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of product experience. International journal of design, 1 (1), 57-66.
Eagly, A. H., & S. Chaiken. 1993. The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. ISBN-10: 01155000977
‏Eysenck, M. W., & M. Brysbaert. 2018. Fundamentals of cognition. Routledge. ISBN-10 ‏1138670456
Gawronski, B. 2007. Attitudes can be measured! But what is an attitude? Social Cognition 25 (5): 573-581. DOI:10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.573
Guay, F., J. Chanal, C. F. Ratelle, H. W. Marsh, S. Larose, & M. Boivin. 2010. Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology 80 (4): 711–735. DOI:10.1348/000709910X499084
Hassan, H. M., & G. H. Galal-Edeen. 2017. From usability to user experience. In 2017 International Conference on Intelligent Informatics and Biomedical Sciences (ICIIBMS) (pp. 216-222). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/ICIIBMS.2017.8279761.
Hassenzahl, M. 2007. The hedonic/pragmatic model of user experience. Towards a UX manifesto 10.
Hassenzahl, M., & N. Tractinsky. 2006. User Experience—A Research Agenda. Behavor Information Technology 2006, 25, 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330331
Hornbæk, K., & A. Oulasvirta. 2017. What is interaction?. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 5040-5052). DOI:10.1145/3025453.3025765
Husseniy, N., T. Abdellatif, & R. Nakhil. 2021. Improving the Websites User Experience (UX) Through the Human-Centered Design Approach (An Analytical Study Targeting Universities Websites in Egypt). Journal of Design Sciences and Applied Arts 2 (2): 24-31. DOI:10.21608/jdsaa.2021.29802.1029
Mkpojiogu, E. O., O. E. Okeke-Uzodike, C. Eze, & E. I. Emmanuel. 2022. A conceptual UX model for the design and evaluation of interactive digital artifacts over time. In 2022 Conference on Information Communications Technology and Society (ICTAS) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. DOI:10.1109/ICTAS53252.2022.9744658
Norman, D., J. Miller, and A. Henderson. 1995. “What You See, Some of What’s in the Future, And How We Go About Doing It: HI at Apple Computer”, presented at the CHI ’95 MOSAIC OF CREATIVITY, p. 1.
DOI:10.1145/223355.223477
Partala, T., & A. Kallinen. 2012. Understanding the most satisfying and unsatisfying user experiences: Emotions, psychological needs, and context. Interacting with computers 24 (1): 25-34. DOI:10.1016/j.intcom.2011.10.001
Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods, second edition. Sage. ISBN-10‏: ‎0761919716
Robert, J. M., & A. Lesage. 2017. Designing and evaluating user experience. In The handbook of human-machine interaction (pp. 321-338). Ashgate, UK: CRC Press.
Robinson, J., C. Lanius, & R. Weber. 2018. The past, present, and future of UX empirical research. Communication Design Quarterly Review 5 (3): 10-23. DOI:10.1145/3188173.3188175
Sharp, H., Y. Rogers, & J. Preece. 2019. Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction (Fifth edition). Wiley. ISBN-10: 1119547253
‏Shouse, E. 2005. Feeling, Emotion, Affect. M/C Journal 8 (6): ?. https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2443
Van der Leer, J., A. Calvén, W. Glad, P. Femenías, & K. Sernhed. 2023. Energy systems in sustainability-profiled districts in Sweden: A literature review and a socio-technical ecology approach for future research. Energy Research & Social Science 101: 103118. DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2023.103118
Verhulsdonck, G., & N. Shalamova. 2020. Creating content that influences people: Considering user experience and behavioral design in technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 50 (4): 376-400. DOI:10.1177/0047281619880286
Warren, C., A. P. McGraw, & L. Van Boven. 2011. Values and preferences: defining preference construction. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2 (2): 193-205. DOI:10.1002/wcs.98
Zarour, M., & M. Alharbi. 2017. User experience framework that combines aspects, dimensions, and measurement methods. Cogent Engineering 4 (1): 1421006. DOI:10.1080/23311916.2017.1421006
Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management
Volume 40, Issue 4 - Serial Number 124
Summer 2025
Pages 1251-1281

  • Receive Date 20 January 2025
  • Revise Date 30 April 2025
  • Accept Date 11 May 2025