# Cumulative Impact of Testing Factors in Usability Tests for Human-Centered Web Design +
## 6 Results
### The Results of the Experiment and Their Interpretation
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Metrics**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Metrics**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Individual Test**} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-10}  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Aesthetic Design**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Non-Aesthetic Design**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Mann-Whitney, \(\Delta\)**} \\  & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**before Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Delta**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**before Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**after Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Delta**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**\(p\)-Value**} \\  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**(A)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**before Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**after Task**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Delta**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**\(p\)-Value**} \\  & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**_P_-Value**} \\ \hline \multirow{9}{*}{**Metrics**} & \multirow{2}{*}{Intellectual ability (A\({}_{\text{meas}}\))} & **187.05** & **182.93** & \(-4.12\) & **186.74** & **178.91** & \(-7.83\) & **0.004** \\  & & & **(1.057)** & **(1.128)** & **(1.504)** & **(1.266)** & **(2.166)** & **(0.319)** & **0.004** \\  & & & 7 & 0 & 7 & 6.9 & \(-0.1\) & \\  & & Calmness/amxiety & (0.471) & (0.480) & (0.667) & (1.490) & (1.449) & (1.853) & 0.912 \\  & & & **6.9** & **5.5** & \(-1.4\) & 6.9 & 5.5 & \(-1.4\) & 1.000 \\  & & & **(1.197)** & **(0.527)** & (1.505) & (1.449) & (1.649) & (2.547) & 1.000 \\  & & & 6.9 & 6.9 & 0 & 7.1 & 7 & \(-0.1\) & \\  & (10 to 1) & & (0.567) & (0.316) & (0.817) & (1.728) & (1.24 design, as well as for presenting the Mann-Whitney U-test \(p\)-values for individual vs. group testing. Restructuring our results for individual vs. group performance, we may state that the trends for group performance differ from those for individual one. As Tables 5 and 6 demonstrate, in three cases out of four (monotony/aesthetic, monotony/non-aesthetic, anxiety/aesthetic, anxiety/non-aesthetic), the group problem-solving enhances the cumulative impact of website aesthetics and task features upon user states. With non-aesthetic web design, collaborative activity leads to user dysfunctionality in combination with any type of tasks: With monotonous tasks, the group environment contributes to the development of fatigue, while with tasks that cause anxiety, anxiety increases, and, in both cases, liability decreases. Aesthetic design partly helps compensate for that in monotony-inducing work, but enhances dysfunctionality when tasks cause anxiety. Performing the task individually may, in case of non-aesthetic design, help neutralize the impact of group task-solving, especially for monotony. With monotonous tasks, using better design and/or switching to individual modes of task solution may bring on better performance. With tasks that imply rapid shifts or intensification in time, though, perfect design causes a reverse effect in both group and individual performance; however, anyway, loss of intellectual liability in anxiety-inducing tasks performed individually is nearly two times smaller overall than in groups, and the rise of anxiety is also 127% (for non-efficient design) to 160% (for efficient design) for group performance as compared to individual. Thus, individual work upon both types of tasks is recommended. _RQ3: What are the cumulative effects of the combination of task features, web aesthetics, and testing circumstances?_  
As deduced from what is said above, it is evident that task features, in general, create two patterns of user reaction, just as they were meant to do. In monotonous tasks, monotony shows up via the pattern 'drop of intellectual ability + growth of fatigue', and for anxiety-inducing tasks the pattern is 'drop of intellectual ability + growth of anxiety.' In both cases, the other three emotional indicators remain stable. This hints towards possible independence of emotions within the users' emotional states and a possibility of reduction of particular emotions in work/study processes via focused changes in work tasks.