# A Hybrid Recommender System for HCI Design Pattern Recommendations
## 7 Discussion  
In this section, we discuss the interpretation of the obtained results. Firstly, regarding the perceived system quality layer, the results reveal that the majority of participants (66%) confirmed that \"the recommended design patterns are relevant and match with the given design problem\". Additionally, according to participants' responses to Q2 and Q3, 50% of participants agreed with the novelty of the IDEPAR system. Moreover, the overall mean of the belief layer was equal to 4.12, and thus exceed the \"Agree\" value. Indeed, participants generally believed that the IDEPAR system helped them to find relevant HCI design patterns and perceived the ease of use of the provided system. Furthermore, the mean value for the attitude layer was equal to 3.80 (SD = 0.83), which reveals overall satisfaction of the participants and a high trust of the IDEPAR system. Concerning the behavioral intention layer, results indicate that 50% of participants strongly agreed that they would use the IDEPAR system again, and 30% of them agreed that they would recommend the system to their colleagues. Overall, we observe that participants assigned relatively low rates, especially for the information sufficiency (Q5, Q6) and for the use intentions (Q12, Q13). These results may come from the difficulty of understanding the information provided by the system. Therefore, richer information regarding the recommended design patterns is needed. We consider this as a stimulus for the future enhancement of the proposed IDEPAR system. Secondly, the reliability of items was conducted with Cronbach's alpha. The obtained alpha was about 0.78, 0.86, and 0.82 for all items of perceived system quality, attitude, and behavioral intention, which exceed the minimum threshold of 0.7. Indeed, the reliability was deemed good for all items, except for the belief items, for which it is considered acceptable. After that, the Pearson coefficient was applied for the target to test the statistical significance of the correlation. In this sense, knowledge of recommender systems and level of expertise with HCI design patterns appeared to be positively correlated with the answers of perceived usefulness, confidence, and trust. In addition, the results of correlation analysis reveal that experience with HCI design patterns has a positive relationship with the perceived accuracy, as denoted with \(p\)-value < 0.001. Overall, correlation analysis indicated that several factors influence participant attitudes regarding perceived accuracy, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, confidence, and trust. The selected factors were mainly concerned about participants' knowledge about recommender systems and their level of experience with HCI design patterns. In brief, the research and development of the presented IDEPAR system allow us to answer the two previously mentioned research questions, RQ1 and RQ2, and thus support the two hypotheses, H1 and H2. More specifically, the findings of the evaluation study reveal that (i) participants had a positive experience regarding IDEPAR system quality \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline  & **Q7** & **Q10** \\ \hline Pearson correlation & 0.873 ** & 0.711 ** \\ Sig. (1-tailed) & \textless{}0.001 & 0.010 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\text{*}}\) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).  
\end{table} 
Table 8: Correlations between participants’ knowledge about recommender systems and answers of Q7 and Q10. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Q1** & **Q7** & **Q9** & **Q10** \\ \hline Pearson correlation & 0.880 ** & 0.744 ** & 0.598 * & 0.595 * \\ Sig. (1-tailed) & \textless{}0.001 & 0.005 & 0.040 & 0.041 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\text{*}}\) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed). ** Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).  
\end{table} 
Table 9: Correlations between participants’ level of expertise with HCI design patterns and answers of Q1, Q7, Q9, and Q10.