The Usability Metric for User Experience
Abstract
The Usability Metric for User Experience (UMUX) is a four-item Likert scale used for the subjective assessment of an application’s perceived usability. It is designed to provide results similar to those obtained with the 10-item System Usability Scale, and is organized around the ISO 9241–11 definition of usability. A pilot version was assembled from candidate items, which was then tested alongside the System Usability Scale during usability testing. It was shown that the two scales correlate well, are reliable, and both align on one underlying usability factor. In addition, the Usability Metric for User Experience is compact enough to serve as a usability module in a broader user experience metric.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The psychometric properties of the SUS are sufficiently studied, with reported reliabilities between 0.79 and 0.97.
“The psychometric properties of the SUS are sufficiently studied with reported reliabilities between 0.79 and 0.97 (e.g. )[16, 17]”
From Dimensionality of the system usability scale among professionals using internet-based interventions for depression: a confirmatory factor analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [17]
Cites
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,888 · see citing works
SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale
(1996) · Usability Evaluation In Industry · doi:10.1201/9781498710411-35 · Cited by 8,989 · see citing works
Usability Evaluation In Industry
(1996) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781498710411 · Cited by 4,400 · see citing works
IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use
Lewis, J. R. (1995) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447319509526110 · Cited by 2,429 · see citing works
Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface
Chin, J. P., Diehl, V. A., & Norman, L. (1988) · ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) · doi:10.1145/57167.57203 · Cited by 1,631 · see citing works
The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale
Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. (2009) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_12 · Cited by 1,278 · see citing works
The Optimal Number of Response Alternatives for a Scale: A Review
Cox, E. P. (1980) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150495 · Cited by 812 · see citing works
Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: evidence against 5-point scales
Finstad, K. (2010) · Journal of Usability Studies archive · Cited by 591 · see citing works
Self-citationA Comparison of Questionnaires for Assessing Website Usability
Tullis, T. S., & Stetson, J. N. (2004) · Cited by 571 · see citing works
Comparison of three one-question, post-task usability questionnaires
Sauro, J., & Dumas, J. S. (2009) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1518701.1518946 · Cited by 511 · see citing works
Scales for assessing perceptions of health hazard susceptibility
Diefenbach, M. A., Weinstein, N. D., & O'Reilly, J. M. (1993) · Health Education Research · doi:10.1093/her/8.2.181 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
The system usability scale and non-native English speakers
Finstad, K. (2006) · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Self-citationTracked Changes. Ergonomics of human-system interaction
(2015) · doi:10.3403/01413630u · Cited by 153 · see citing works
The system usability scale and non-native English speakers
FinstadKraig (2006) · Journal of Usability Studies archive · doi:10.5555/2835531.2835535 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Methods For Evaluating User Interfaces
Holyer, A. (1993) · OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.20290.94406 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future
Lewis, J. R. (2018) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1455307 · Cited by 1,958 · see citing works
UMUX-LITE: when there's no time for the SUS
Lewis, J. R., Utesch, B. S., & Maher, D. E. (2013) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2481287 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Borsci, S., Malizia, A., Schmettow, M., van der Velde, F., Tariverdiyeva, G., Balaji, D., & Chamberlain, A. (2022) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-021-01582-9 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence for literature reviews: opportunities and challenges
Bolaños, F., Salatino, A., Osborne, F., & Motta, E. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10902-3 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Borsci, S., Federici, S., Bacci, S., Gnaldi, M., & Bartolucci, F. (2015) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2015.1064648 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Mol, M., van Schaik, A., Dozeman, E., Ruwaard, J., Vis, C., Ebert, D. D., Etzelmueller, A., Mathiasen, K., Moles, B., Mora, T., et al. (2020) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02627-8 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Strazdas, D., Hintz, J., Khalifa, A., Abdelrahman, A. A., Hempel, T., & Al-Hamadi, A. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22030923 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Beyond Intrinsic Motivation: The Role of Autonomous Motivation in User Experience
Bennett, D., & Mekler, E. D. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3689044 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Caulfield, B., Reginatto, B., & Slevin, P. (2019) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-019-0082-4 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Facilitating Bodily Insights Using Electromyography-Based Biofeedback during Physical Activity
Karolus, J., Bachmann, F., Kosch, T., Schmidt, A., & Woźniak, P. W. (2021) · Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3447526.3472027 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Rodriguez-Gil, L., Garcia-Zubia, J., Orduna, P., Villar-Martinez, A., & Lopez-De-Ipina, D. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2883500 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Finstad, K.
- Affiliations
- Intel (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Finstad, Kraig
- ORCID
- Finstad, Kraig
- Venue
- Interacting with Computers
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 323-327
- ISSN
- 0953-5438 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2154686027
- Cited by
- 604
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 53 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 20.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Interacting with Computers (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- perceived usability, user experience metrics, System Usability Scale, ISO 9241-11, usability evaluation, Likert scale, scale reliability, scale correlation
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
