Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 455

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Usability measurement in context

BEVAN, NIGEL, MACLEOD, MILES·1994·Behaviour & Information Technology
DOI 10.1080/01449299408914592
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Different approaches to the measurement of usability are reviewed and related to definitions of usability in international standards. It is concluded that reliable measures of overall usability can only be obtained by assessing the effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which representative users carry out representative tasks in representative environments.This requires a detailed understanding of the context of use of a product. The ESPRIT MUSiC project has developed tools which can be used to measure usability in the laboratory and the field. An overview is given of the methods and tools for measuring user performance, cognitive workload, and user perceived quality.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01449299408914592

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. BEVAN N., 1991, Computer Bulletin
  2. BEVAN N., 1994, The Management and Measurement of Software Quality
  3. BROOKE J., 1990, Human Computer Interaction - INTERACT '90, 357
  4. BULLINGER , H-J. 1991 , Proceedings of the Ath International Conference on Human Computer Interaction ( Amsterdam Elsevier ).
  5. 10.1145/67933.67934 · DOI
  6. 10.1145/142750.142886 · DOI
  7. 10.1145/142750.142873 · DOI · Paper page
  8. KIERAS D. E., 1988, Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 135, 10.1016/B978-0-444-70536-5.50012-9 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1111/j.1467-8535.1993.tb00076.x · DOI
  10. MACLEOD M., 1992, DRUM User Guide
  11. MACLEOD M., 1993, Usability Context Analysis A Practice Guide
  12. MACLEOD M., 1993, People and Computers, 293
  13. MAISSEL J., 1991, Context Guidelines Handbook
  14. 1992, The Windows Interface-An Application Design Guide
  15. NIELSEN J., 1994, Usability Inspection Methods, 10.1145/259963.260531 · DOI · Paper page
  16. OPPERMANN R., 1989, Evaluation of Dialog Systems
  17. RAVDEN S. J., 1989, Evaluating the Usability of Human-Computer Interfaces
  18. REITERER H., 1992, People and Computers
  19. RENGGER R., 1993, MUSiC Performance Measurement Handbook
  20. SMITH S. L., 1986, Guidelines for Designing User Interface Software, 10.21236/ADA177198 · DOI · Paper page
  21. THEAKER C. J., 1989, HCI'89, 427
  22. WHITESIDE J., 1988, Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 791, 10.1016/B978-0-444-70536-5.50041-5 · DOI
  23. WEITHOFF M., 1991, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, 661

Cited by

See all 455

Metadata

Authors
BEVAN, N., & MACLEOD, M.
Venue
Behaviour & Information Technology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1994-01
Volume
13
Issue
1-2
Pages
132-145
ISSN
  • 0144-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-3001
DOI
10.1080/01449299408914592
OpenAlex
W2165031063
Cited by
455
References
2
FWCI
17.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Usability measurement in context. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01449299408914592
The paper
BEVAN, N., & MACLEOD, M. (1994). Usability measurement in context. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449299408914592

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.