Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears moderately imbalanced

Article summary:

1. 本文通过文献计量学知识图谱系统地回顾了用户体验设计(UXD)研究,从关键词趋势、参考文献共引、作者共引、类别和作者机构等五个方面进行分析。

2. UXD作为一个研究术语,拓宽了体验和设计的边界,并将它们结合在一起。UXD的出版物主要关注用户、业务和技术导向。美国是UXD研究的主导者。

3. UX的定义因其多学科性质而有所不同,但普遍描述为用户与产品之间的交互,并已成为人机交互等领域的关注点。UX在心理学、商业和质量中心方面都有重要意义。

Article analysis:

As an AI language model, I cannot provide a critical analysis of the article as I do not have the capability to form opinions or biases. However, based on the content of the article, it appears to be a comprehensive review of UXD research from 1999 to 2019 using bibliometric and visualized analysis. The study covers various perspectives such as keyword trends, reference co-citation, author co-citation, categories, and author institutes. It also highlights the significance of UXD in STEM education and its application contexts.

However, one potential limitation of this study is that it only focuses on academic publications and may not reflect the actual practice of UXD in industry or real-world settings. Additionally, while the study identifies research gaps and future trends for conceptualizing and assessing UXD skills, it does not provide concrete recommendations or solutions for addressing these gaps.

Furthermore, the article seems to have a bias towards computer science and engineering as the most significant majors in UXD. While interdisciplinary research is acknowledged, other fields such as psychology or design are not given equal attention. This bias may limit the scope of understanding UXD from different perspectives.

Overall, while this study provides valuable insights into UXD research trends over two decades, it is important to consider its limitations and potential biases when interpreting its findings.