CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 275Usability and User Interface DesignPsychometric Methodologies and TestingTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: a test of alternative measurement models

Borsci, Simone, Federici, Stefano, Lauriola, Marco·2009·Cognitive Processing
DOI 10.1007/s10339-009-0268-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The System Usability Scale (SUS), developed by Brooke (Usability evaluation in industry, Taylor & Francis, London, pp 189-194, 1996), had a great success among usability practitioners since it is a quick and easy to use measure for collecting users' usability evaluation of a system. Recently, Lewis and Sauro (Proceedings of the human computer interaction international conference (HCII 2009), San Diego CA, USA, 2009) have proposed a two-factor structure-Usability (8 items) and Learnability (2 items)-suggesting that practitioners might take advantage of these new factors to extract additional information from SUS data. In order to verify the dimensionality in the SUS' two-component structure, we estimated the parameters and tested with a structural equation model the SUS structure on a sample of 196 university users. Our data indicated that both the unidimensional model and the two-factor model with uncorrelated factors proposed by Lewis and Sauro (Proceedings of the human computer interaction international conference (HCII 2009), San Diego CA, USA, 2009) had a not satisfactory fit to the data. We thus released the hypothesis that Usability and Learnability are independent components of SUS ratings and tested a less restrictive model with correlated factors. This model not only yielded a good fit to the data, but it was also significantly more appropriate to represent the structure of SUS ratings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10339-009-0268-9

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 15 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bentler PM (2004) EQS structural equations modeling software (Version 6.1) (Computer software). Multivariate Software, Encino

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 275

Related

Metadata

Authors
Borsci, S., Federici, S., & Lauriola, M.
Affiliations
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
  • University of Perugia (IT)
Corresponding author
Borsci, Simone
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive Processing
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2009-06-30
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
193-197
ISSN
  • 1612-4782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1612-4790
DOI
10.1007/s10339-009-0268-9
OpenAlex
W2058625228
Cited by
275
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Cognitive Processing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
System Usability Scale, usability evaluation, dimensionality, two-factor model, learnability, usability, correlated factors, measurement model, structural equation modeling, user ratings
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Models, Theoretical, Surveys and Questionnaires, User-Computer Interface, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review