5. CONCLUSION
5.1. Future work
While the prototype is implemented and revealed a good usability, there is still a plenty of space for enhancing.
Design improvements
Elgg framework represented itself as a strong tool for EBSN implementation and services integration, however when it comes to the highest level of customization several limitations are faced. Other option shall be considered in order to fully achieve mockup conformity, which can drastically improve the design of the service.
Implementation of missing features
As all requirements are fulfilled there were interesting feature proposals provided by respondents. In the future additional surveys can be conducted for validation of new features and continuous service update.
More in depth different social group research
All surveys were conducted for different social groups, however we can specifically test certain functions with targeted audience for user experience improvement.
Make the application completely multiplatform
The service can be implemented for existing mobile and desktop platforms. Such approach will secure stability and will provide an extra usability.
217-231.
3. Smith, D., Mayes, T., & Smith, R. (2012). Culture-Specific Diagnoses. In Encyclopedia of Immigrant Health (pp. 49-64). Springer New York.
4. Bakıcı, T., Almirall, E., & Wareham, J. (2013). A smart city initiative: the case of Barcelona. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4(2), 135-148.
5. Mora, L., & Bolici, R. (2015, November). How to become a smart city: Learning from Amsterdam. In International conference on Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions (pp. 251-266). Springer, Cham.
6. de Sola Pool, I., & Kochen, M. (1978). Contacts and influence. Social networks, 1(1), 5-51.
7. Pennisi E (2011) How humans became social. In: Wired.com.
https://www.wired.com/2011/11/humans-social/. Accessed 4 Apr 2018
8. Wang, C., Ye, M., & Lee, W. C. (2012, October). From face-to-face gathering to social structure. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management (pp. 465-474). ACM.
9. Koukopoulos, Z., & Koukopoulos, D. (2018). Intelligent Management of Outdoor Cultural Events Promoting Exploitation in Smart City Environments. In Innovative Approaches to Tourism and Leisure (pp. 303-319). Springer, Cham.
10. Nowland, R., Necka, E. A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2017). Loneliness and Social Internet Use: Pathways to Reconnection in a Digital World?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1745691617713052.
11. Preston J (2014) Infographic: the importance of face to face networking. In: Virgin.
https://www.virgin.com/entrepreneur/infographic-the-importance-of-face-to-face-networking. Accessed 10 April 2018.
12. Cummings, J. N., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online social relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103-108.
13. Warkentin, M. E., Sayeed, L., & Hightower, R. (1997). Virtual teams versus face‐to‐
face teams: an exploratory study of a Web‐based conference system. Decision Sciences, 28(4), 975-996.
14. Liu, X., He, Q., Tian, Y., Lee, W. C., McPherson, J., & Han, J. (2012, August). Event-based social networks: linking the online and offline social worlds. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining(pp. 1032-1040). ACM.
15. Statista – The statistic portal for market data, market research and industry studies (2018). In: https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/ Accessed 4 May 2018.
16. Zhang, Y., & Leung, L. (2015). A review of social networking service (SNS) research in communication journals from 2006 to 2011. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1007-1024.
17. Symeonidis, P., Ntempos, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2014). Location-based social networks. In Recommender systems for location-based social networks (pp. 35-48).
Springer, New York, NY.
18. Traynor, D., & Curran, K. (2012). Location-based social networks. From Government to E-Governance: Public Administration in the Digital Age, 243.
19. Zheng Y, Xie X (2011) Location-Based Social Networks - Microsoft Research. In:
Microsoft Research. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/location-based-social-networks/. Accessed 16 Apr 2018
20. Symeonidis, P., Ntempos, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2014). Recommender systems for location-based social networks (pp. 21-34). New York: Springer.
21. Jhamb, Y., & Fang, Y. (2017). A dual-perspective latent factor model for group-aware social event recommendation. Information Processing & Management, 53(3), 559-576.
22. Li, X., Cheng, X., Su, S., Li, S., & Yang, J. (2017). A hybrid collaborative filtering model for social influence prediction in event-based social networks. Neurocomputing, 230, 197-209.
26. Meetup category classification (2018). In: https://www.meetup.com/.
https://www.meetup.com/topics. Accessed 20 May 2018.
27. Similarweb – Service for analysis of the statistics & market share of any website or app (2018). In: https://www.similarweb.com/website/vk.com#websiteContent. Accessed 11 May 2018.
28. Mockups creation tool. https://balsamiq.com/products/mockups 29. Open source framework Elgg. https://elgg.org/
30. Sharma, M. (2008). Elgg social networking. Packt Publishing Ltd.
31. MVC pattern (2013). In: habr.com. https://habr.com/post/181772/ Accessed 14 May 2018.
34. Usability: definitions and concepts (2018). ISO 9241-11:2018. In:
https://www.iso.org/standard/63500.html
35. Virzi R (1992) Refining the Test Phase of Usability Evaluation: How Many Subjects Is Enough?. Human Factors - Special issue: measurement in human factors 34:457-468.
36. Nielsen, J., & Landauer, T. K. (1993, May). A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 206-213). ACM.
37. Woolrych, A., & Cockton, G. (2001, September). Why and when five test users aren’t enough. In Proceedings of IHM-HCI 2001 conference (Vol. 2, pp. 105-108).
Eds)(Cépaduès Editions, Toulouse, FR, 2001).
38. Perfetti C (2001) Eight is Not Enough. In: UX Articles by UIE.
https://articles.uie.com/eight_is_not_enough/. Accessed 10 Apr 2017
39. Bevan, N., Barnum, C., Cockton, G., Nielsen, J., Spool, J., & Wixon, D. (2003, April).
The magic number 5: is it enough for web testing?. In CHI'03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 698-699). ACM.
40. Faulkner, L. (2003). Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(3), 379-383.
41. Kanis H (2011) Estimating the number of usability problems. Applied ergonomics, 42(2), 337-347.
42. Bastien, J. C. (2010). Usability testing: a review of some methodological and technical aspects of the method. International journal of medical informatics, 79(4), e18-e23.
43. Romano Bergstrom J (2013) Moderating Usability Tests | Usability.gov. In:
Usability.gov. https://www.usability.gov/get-involved/blog/2013/04/moderating-usability-tests.html. Accessed 22 May 2018
44. Dumas, J. S., Dumas, J. S., & Redish, J. (1999). A practical guide to usability testing.
Intellect books.
45. TryMyUi (2017) SUS: The System Usability Scale. In: TryMyUi.
https://www.trymyui.com/sus-system-usability-scale. Accessed 22 May 2018
46. Thomas N (2015) How To Use The System Usability Scale (SUS) To Evaluate The Usability Of Your Website. In: Usabilitygeek.com. http://usabilitygeek.com/how-to-use-the-system-usability-scale-sus-to-evaluate-the-usability-of-your-website/.
Accessed 22 May 2018
47. Department of Health and Human Services (2017) System Usability Scale (SUS) | Usability.gov. In: Usability.gov. https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/system-usability-scale.html. Accessed 22 May 2018
Figure A – 1. Survey for a requirement verification, attendee part
Figure A – 2. Survey for a requirement verification, organizer part
Figure B – 1. Login and register interface
Figure B – 2. Profile page
Figure B – 3. Activity page
Figure B – 4. Events page
Figure B – 5. Calendar
Figure B – 6. Map
Figure B – 7. Advanced event filter
Figure B – 8. Category groups
Figure B – 9. Category groups interface
Figure B – 10. Event information page
Figure B – 11. Service membership page
Figure B – 12. Blog page
Figure B – 13. “Wiki” page
Figure B – 14. Report submit
Appendix С: Site screenshots
Figure C – 1. Login and register interface
Figure C – 2. Profile page
Figure C – 3. Activity page
Figure C – 4. Events page
Figure C – 5. Calendar
Figure C – 7. Advanced event filter
Figure C – 8. Category groups
Figure C – 9. Category groups interface
Figure C – 10. Event information page
Figure C – 11. Service membership page
Figure C – 12. Blog page
Figure C – 13. “Wiki” page
Figure C – 14. Report submit
Appendix D: Mobile version
Figure D – 1. Login and register interface
Figure D – 2. Profile page
Figure D – 3. Activity page
Figure D – 4. Events page
Figure D – 5. Calendar
Figure D – 6. Map
Figure D – 7. Advanced event filter
Figure D – 8. Category groups
Figure D – 9. Category groups interface
Figure D – 10. Event information page
Figure D – 11. Service membership page
Figure D – 12. Blog page
Figure D – 13. “Wiki” page
Figure D – 14. Report Submit
Appendix E: Tablet version
Figure E – 1. Login and register interface
Figure E – 2. Profile page
Figure E – 3. Activity page
Figure E – 4. Events page
Figure E – 5. Calendar
Figure E – 6. Map
Figure E – 7. Advanced event filter
Figure E – 8. Category groups
Figure E – 9. Category groups interface
Figure E – 10. Event information page
Figure E – 11. Service membership page
Figure E – 12. Blog page
Figure E – 13. “Wiki” page
Figure E – 14. Report Submit