Measuring Perceived Usability: The SUS, UMUX-LITE, and AltUsability

REFERENCES

• Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24, 574–594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2009). Determining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4, 114–123.
   Google Scholar
• Borsci, S., Federici, S., & Lauriola, M. (2009). On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: A test of alternative measurement models. Cognitive Processes, 10, 193–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borsci, S., Federici, S., Gnaldi, M., Bacci, S., & Bartolucci, F. (this issue). Assessing user satisfaction in the era of user experience: An exploratory analysis of SUS, UMUX and UMUX–LITE. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, XX, xx–xx.
   Google Scholar
• Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. Jordan, B. Thomas, & B. Weerdmeester (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, J. P., Diehl, V. A., Norman, K. L. (1988). Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human–computer interface. In Proceedings of CHI 1988 (pp. 213–218). Washington, DC: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diefenbach, S., Kolb, N., & Hassenzahl, M. (2014). The “Hedonic” in human–computer interaction: History, contributions, and future research directions. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems–DIS 14 (pp. 305–314). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Finstad, K. (2006). The System Usability Scale and non-native English speakers. Journal of Usability Studies, 1, 185–188.
   Google Scholar
• Finstad, K. (2010). The usability metric for user experience. Interacting with Computers, 22, 323–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finstad, K. (2013). Response to commentaries on “The Usability Metric for User Experience.” Interacting with Computers, 25, 327–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grier, R. A., Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Peres, S. C. (2013). The System Usability Scale: Beyond standard usability testing. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 187–191). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• ISO, 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), Part 11, Guidance on usability (ISO 9241–11:1998E). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Kirakowski, J., & Dillon, A. (1988). The Computer User Satisfaction Inventory (CUSI): Manual and scoring key. Human Factors Research Group, University College of Cork, Cork, Ireland.
   Google Scholar
• LaLomia, M. J., & Sidowski, J. B. (1990). Measurements of computer satisfaction, literacy, and aptitudes: A review. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2, 231–253.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (1990). Psychometric evaluation of a post-study system usability questionnaire: The PSSUQ (Tech. Rep. No. 54.535). Boca Raton, FL: IBM.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (1993). Multipoint scales: Mean and median differences and observed significance levels. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 5, 383–392.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (1999). Trade-offs in the design of the IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires. In H. Bullinger & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Human–computer interaction: Ergonomics and user interfaces—Vol. I (pp. 1023–1027). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (2013). Critical review of “The Usability Metric for User Experience.” Interacting with Computers, 25, 320–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (2014). Usability: Lessons learned … and yet to be learned. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 30, 663–684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. (2009). The factor structure of the System Usability Scale. In M. Kurosu (Ed.), Human centered design (pp. 94–103). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R., Utesch, B. S., & Maher, D. E. (2013). UMUX-LITE—When there’s no time for the SUS. In Proceedings of CHI 2013 (pp. 2099–2102). Paris, France: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R., Utesch, B. S., & Maher, D. E. (in press). Investigating the correspondence between UMUX-LITE and SUS scores. In Proceedings of HCII 2015. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Reichheld, F. F. (2003). The one number you need to grow. Harvard Business Review, 81, 46–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reichheld, F. F. (2006). The ultimate question: Driving good profits and true growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2009). Correlations among prototypical usability metrics: Evidence for the construct of usability. In Proceedings of CHI 2009 (pp. 1609–1618). Boston, MA: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2011). When designing usability questionnaires, does it hurt to be positive? In Proceedings of CHI 2011 (pp. 2215–2223). Vancouver, Canada: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2012). Quantifying the user experience: Practical statistics for user research. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8, 350–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tullis, T. S., & Stetson, J. N. (2004). A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability. Paper presented at the Usability Professionals Association Annual Conference, Minneapolis, MN. Available from home.comcast.net/˜tomtullis/publications/UPA2004TullisStetson.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wu, J., Chen, Y., & Lin, L. (2007). Empirical evaluation of the revised end user computing acceptance model. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 162–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar