Working Group Definition: Psychology and UX of e-ink

Status: Accepted
Name: Psychology of e-ink devices and optimising UX for productivity and wellbeing!

Objective: Investigate possible psychological benefits of e-ink compared with other types of display (e.g. LCD, OLED), by conducting controlled, scientific, rigorous studies.

Background: Quite a lot of eink users anecdotally report beneficial psychological effects of eink when compared with LCD, OLED etc displays, e.g. less screen/eye fatigue (or even some much stronger effects…). But is this an empirically verifiable property of eink more generally?

Some research has been conducted previously, with some in support of the above anecdotal evidence (e.g. Benedetto et al., 2013; Benedetto et al., 2014), and some not supporting it (e.g. Siegenthaler et al., 2012). We want to do some investigations for ourselves to find out more!

In addition, we will be ideating and investigating ways in which to design the UX of eink devices to improve things like productivity and wellbeing through psychology!

Audience: This proposal is for anyone who wants to know whether there is any scientifically verifiable psychological difference between eink and LCDs, or who is interested in designing user experiences to maximise productivity and wellbeing!
Timeline: Project getting started now but will kick into gear properly from 25/05/2021 – 25/09/2021 (when I can devote my full time to this)
Members: Tom Phillips @tom.cxphillips (lead). Looking for new members who want to contribute!
Contact: contact via Zulip @tom.cxphillips
URL: xxx
Hardware: N/A currently. Studies will be using some secondhand devices we can get hands on cheaply!
Looking for: If enthusiastic, people to help design, run, analyse some psychology experiments. No special skills needed! Alternatively, people who are willing to contribute perhaps by lending eink devices for the experiments (but will need to work out how this might work…!). No required time-commitment, no contribution is too small etc etc! Shoot me a message on Zulip!!!

References
Benedetto et al. (2013): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24386252/
Benedetto et al. (2014): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563214004750
Siegenthaler et al. (2012): https://bop.unibe.ch/JEMR/article/view/2338

3 Likes

@tom.cxphillips Accepted! Welcome to the community and looking forward to this!

2 Likes