# Measuring Anticipated and Episodic UX of Tasks in Social Networks
## 5 Demonstration and Evaluation
### Method
#### 5.2.2 Procedure  
We carried out the AUX and EUX assessment of user-tools in a peaceful ambiance to limit outer sources of noise in our study. Each volunteer individually participates in the testing sessions, which were conducted by a moderator in situ.  
As the first step of our tests, participants filled a questionnaire about their demographic information and former contact with social networks. Afterwards, participants performed the tasks and assessments.  
Each session had a length of around 40 min. We run the tests in 20 days, i.e., one participant per day. All tests were done around 10 a.m.; we did this to try to have a similar state in each participant.  
The results of the aforementioned questionnaire reported that YouTube is proven to be the most used platform by our participants with 100% of usage. As for Facebook, it got a moderated use with 47%, and Reddit was the least used with 2%. Therefore, we decided to use these three platforms to asses EUX.  
First of all, we said that our goal was to improve the design of user-tools through the contrast of AUX and EUX. To achieve this, we devised the following three tasks that represent common activities within social networks. Participants would have to complete each one twice, one for AUX, and one for EUX, during the trial:  
1. **Message:** Transmit a private message to another user.
2. **Publication:** Share multimedia.
3. **Search:** Look for somebody or for a certain theme.  
To identify the required user-tools for accomplishing each task, we analyzed different ways, e.g., giving them user-tools made up of paper cut-outs. Nevertheless, if we provided participants with a predetermined set of user-tools, they would have prejudices, i.e., we would obtain very similar results between each participant, including the possibility of identical prototypes, consequently limiting their feedback significantly. Thus, for the AUX assessment step, the best alternative was that each participant created their own user-tools.  
The next two steps of our method are the AUX and EUX assessments of user-tools:  
* **Prototypes construction:** First, we asked participants to imagine that they took the role of a Web designer with the aim of creating a novel GUI for a social network. Afterwards, relying on their experience, they had to create three paper prototypes, corresponding to the three tasks previously defined. Participants had to draw GUI elements to solve the tasks, just as if they were designing a website GUI. In our pilot tests, we obtained prototypes similar to the one depicted in Figure 2(a), so we resolved to design a canvas to make it easier for the participants to create their prototypes. Figure 2(b)-d show random samples of prototypes in our actual tests. When they concluded the construction and description of each prototype, participants had to assess them with the AttrakDiff questionnaire. Therefore, this stage allowed participants to explain their decisions about how they conceive the behavior of the GUI, the rationale behind their designs, and the user-tools required to accomplish each task. In this manner, we assess the AUX of user-tools.
* **Tasks using online social networks:** Once the three prototypes and their assessments were concluded, we asked participants to carry out the same three tasks, but now using online social networks. Hence, on Reddit, participants transmitted a private message to another user; on Facebook, they shared multimedia, and on YouTube, they sought for a somebody or for a certain topic. Like in the previous stage, after finishing each task, they had to assess it through the AttrakDiff questionnaire. Just like that, we assess the EUX of user-tools.  
In this way, and taking into account that each participant made six evaluations, we finished with 120 questionnaires: 60 corresponding to AUX and 60 to EUX.