The effect of user variables on academic websites usability : An empirical study

References

• Sagar, Kalpna, and Anju Saha. “Qualitative usability feature selection with ranking: a novel approach for ranking the identified usability problematic attributes for academic websites using data-mining techniques.” Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences 7.1 (2017): 29. doi: 10.1186/s13673-017-0111-8
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, James R. “Usability: lessons learned … and yet to be learned.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 30.9 (2014): 663-684. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2014.930311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kortum, Philip T., and Aaron Bangor. “Usability ratings for everyday products measured with the System Usability Scale.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29.2 (2013): 67-76. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2012.681221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, James R. “The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future.” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction: 1-14 (2018). doi: 10.1080/10447318.2018.1533152
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooke, J. SUS A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194) (1996). London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. IBM Computer Satisfaction Questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7(1), 57–78 (1995). doi: 10.1080/10447319509526110
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirakowski, J., & Corbett, M. SUMI: The Software Measurement Inventory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 24, 210–212 (1993). doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.1993.tb00076.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, A. (2001) Measuring usability with the USE Questionnaire. Usability Interface: The usability SIG newsletter of the Society for Technical Communications, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.stcsig.org/usability/newsletter/0110_measuring_with_use.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kirakowski, J., Claridge, N., & Whitehand, R. (1998). Human centered measures of success in Web design. Conference Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Human Factors and the Web. Retrieved from http://www.research.att.com/conf/hfweb/proceedings/kirakows-ki/index.html.
   Google Scholar
• Flavián, Carlos, Miguel Guinalíu, and Raquel Gurrea. “The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty.” Information & Management 43.1 (2006): 1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2005.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copus, G. M., & Elder, L. (2004). Comparing data input methods on handheld computers. Usability News, 6(2). Retrieved from http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/62/pdf/Usability%20 News%2062%20-%20Copas2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wechsung, I., & Naumann, A. B. Evaluation methods for multimodal systems: A comparison of standardized usability questionnaires. In E. André, L. Dybkjær, W. Minker, H. Neumann, R. Pieraccini, & M. Weber (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 276–284) (2008). Berlin, Germany:Springer
   Google Scholar
• Evans, R., & Kortum, P. The impact of voice characteristics on user response in an interactive voice response system. Interacting with Computers, 22, 606–614 (2010). doi: 10.1016/j.intcom.2010.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Everett, S. P., Byrne, M. D., & Greene, K. K. Measuring the usability of paper ballots: Efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting (pp.2547–2551) (2006). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, K. K., Byrne, M. D., & Everett, S. P. (2006). A comparison of usability between voting methods. Proceedings of the USENIX/Accurate Electronic Voting Technology Workshop 2006 on Electronic Voting Technology Workshop EVT’06 (p. 2). Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, B., Tossell, C. T., Byrne, M. D., & Kortum, P. (2011). Voting on a smartphone: Evaluating the usability of an optimized voting system for handheld mobile devices. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 1100–1104). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Költringer, T., & Grechenig, T. Comparing the immediate usability of graffiti 2 and virtual keyboard. CHI ‘04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems CHI EA ‘04 (pp. 1175–1178) (2004). New York, NY:ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Nithyanand, R., Saxena, N., Tsudik, G., &Uzun, E. Groupthink: Usability of secure group association for wireless devices. Proceedings of the 12th ACM international conference on Ubiquitous computing (Ubicomp’10) (pp. 331–340) (2010). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Trafton, J., Martins, S., Michel, M., Lewis, E., Wang, D., Combs, A., Goldstein, M. K. Evaluation of the acceptability and usability of a decision support system to encourage safe and effective use of opioid therapy for chronic, non cancer pain by primary care providers. Pain Medicine,11, 575–585 (2010). doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2010.00818.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. The factor structure of the System Usability Scale. In M. Kurosu (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Human Centered Design: Held as Part of HCI International 2009 (pp.94–103) (2009). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bangor, A., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. A. The System Usability Scale (SUS): An empirical evaluation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24, 574–594 (2008). doi: 10.1080/10447310802205776
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus, A. User interface design’s return on investment: Examples and statistics. In R. G. Bias & D. J. Mayhew (Eds.), Cost justifying usability: An update for the Internet age (pp. 17–36). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, James R. “Usability: lessons learned … and yet to be learned.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 30.9 (2014): 663-684. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2014.930311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snagar, K., & Saha, A. Enhancing Usability Inspection Through Data-Mining Techniques: An Automated Approach for Detecting Usability Problem Patterns of Academic Websites. In International Conference on Intelligent Human Computer Interaction (pp. 229-247) 2016, December. Springer, Cham.
   Google Scholar
• Pyle D (1999) Data Preparation for Data Mining. M. Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• http://classroom.synonym.com/advantage-doing-experiments-large-samples-13175.html.
   Google Scholar
• Bangor, A., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. A. Determining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4, 114–123 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• MacDorman, K. F., Whalen, T. J., Ho, C., & Patel, H. An improved usability measure based on novice and expert performance. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 27, 280–302 (2011). doi: 10.1080/10447318.2011.540472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González, María Paula, et al. “Testing Website Usability in Spanish-Speaking Academia through Heuristic Evaluation and Cognitive Walkthroughs.” J. UCS 14.9 (2008): 1513-1528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/india-set-to-have-530-million-smartphone-users-in-2018-study-4893159/
   Google Scholar