02305nas a2200265   4500008004100000022001400041245008300055210006900138260004200207300000900249490000600258520151400264653001301778653001501791653001501806653001301821653002001834653002001854100002801874700002101902700002301923700002301946700003301969856003702002       2018                        eng d  a1927-032100aA Taxonomy of Factors Influencing Drop-Out Behaviour in Living Lab Field Tests0 aTaxonomy of Factors Influencing DropOut Behaviour in Living Lab   aOttawabTalent First Networkc05/2018  a5-210 v83 aThe concept of a “living lab” is a relatively new research area and phenomenon that facilitates user engagement in open innovation activities. Studies on living labs show that the users’ motivation to participate in a field test is higher at the beginning of the project than during the rest of the test, and that participants have a tendency to drop out before completing the assigned tasks. However, the literature still lacks theories describing the phenomenon of drop-out within the area of field tests in general and living lab field tests in particular. As the first step in constructing a theoretical discourse, the aims of this study are to present an empirically derived taxonomy for the various factors that influence drop-out behaviour; to provide a definition of “drop-out” in living lab field tests; and to understand the extent to which each of the identified items influence participant drop-out behaviour. To achieve these aims, we first extracted factors influencing drop-out behaviour in the field test from our previous studies on the topic, and then we validated the extracted results across 14 semi-structured interviews with experts in living lab field tests. Our findings show that identified reasons for dropping out can be grouped into three themes: innovation-related, process-related, and participant-related. Each theme consists of three categories with a total of 44 items. In this study, we also propose a unified definition of “drop-out” in living lab field tests.10adrop-out10afield test10aLiving lab10ataxonomy10auser engagement10auser motivation1 aHabibipour, Abdolrasoul1 aGeorges, Annabel1 aStåhlbröst, Anna1 aSchuurman, Dimitri1 aBergvall-Kåreborn, Birgitta  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/115501723nas a2200253   4500008004100000022001400041245008100055210006900136260004200205300001000247490000600257520098800263653001401251653001301265653001601278653001501294653002001309653002001329653002101349100002101370700002301391700001901414856003601433       2016                        eng d  a1927-032100aFactors Affecting the Attrition of Test Users During Living Lab Field Trials0 aFactors Affecting the Attrition of Test Users During Living Lab   aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2016  a35-440 v63 aNext to active user involvement and a multi-method approach, a third major principle within living lab research consists of capturing the real-life context in which an innovation is used by end users. Field trials are a method to study the interaction of test users with an innovation in the context of use. However, when conducting field trials, there are several reasons why users stop participating in research activities, a phenomenon labelled as attrition. In this article, we elaborate on drop-outs during field trials by analyzing three post-trial surveys of living lab field trials. Our results show that several factors related to the innovation, as well as related to the field trial setup, play a role in attrition, including the lack of added value of the innovation and the extent to which the innovation satisfies the needs and time restrictions of test users. Based on our findings, we provide practical guidelines for managers to reduce attrition during field trials.10aattrition10adrop-out10afield trial10aLiving lab10aOpen innovation10auser engagement10auser involvement1 aGeorges, Annabel1 aSchuurman, Dimitri1 aVervoort, Koen  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/959