The autotelic experience : a design approach to user experience
If usability guides the formal organisation of interactive systems as it pertains to being usable, useful and efficient, what principle(s) guide(s) the formal organisation of interactive systems when it comes to give form to the subjective dimension of the user experience? This question came from two perceived gaps in our understanding of UX: (1) the UX theoretical framework appears incomplete to this day. Going beyond experiencing, what is at play during Dewey’s an experience? (2) The process and abilities of designers are underused in the current theoretical and practical UX framework; what would provide a more designerly approach? We propose that the autotelic experience could bridge these gaps and be the UX counterpart to usability. The autotelic experience is an internal dimension at the heart of the optimal experience—Flow—(Csikszentmihalyi, 1975) and covering the whole of the aesthetic experience (Schaeffer, 2000). The autotelic experience is a shift in awareness occurring during the interaction. This awareness is accompanied by an imperceptible tension of wanting to make this moment last in order to continue enjoying the pleasure it generates (a circular motivation to stay in the interaction for the sake of the interaction itself) (Schaeffer, 2000). Our results suggest the key to the autotelic experience sits with visuospatial reasoning or more specifically to right hemisphere (RH) activation. Three exploratory studies were conducted, using a three-part theoretical framework where Flow, signs of nonverbal / spatial activity (physical gestures) and of verbal activity (discourse) were assessed for their various associations.  The main contribution of this research is a model of autotelic experience made of three interlocking elements (high positive pressure, low mental demand and an openness to unexpected events) contextualised by either an active or a receptive engagement on the part of the user. One of the findings is that the pragmatic experience and the autotelic experience (which we have associated to Dewey’s an experience, 1934), are based on one and the same content, the only difference is the shift in attention on the participant’s part.  All the elements of the model are known, but one, to design the experience in a way to keep the user open to the unexpected. This one element supports the occurrence of the shift from ordinary to autotelic attention. The new model opens the door to a better appreciation of designers’ skills and processes within multidisciplinary team in UX design.
Design Flow User experience Autotelic experience Aesthetic experience Verbal and spatial processes