Cited by 87Usability and User Interface DesignInnovative Human-Technology InteractionErgonomics and Human Factors

The Usability Construct: A Dead End?

Tractinsky, Noam·2018·Human–Computer Interaction

Abstract

“Usability” is a construct conceived by the human–computer interaction (HCI) community to denote a desired quality of interactive systems and products. Despite its prominence and intensive use in HCI research, the usefulness of the usability construct to HCI theories and to our understanding of HCI has been meager. In this article I propose and discuss two reasons for this state of affairs. The first is that usability is an umbrella construct. Umbrella constructs are prevalent in scientific fields that are broad, diverse, and lack a unifying research paradigm. Accordingly, umbrella constructs, such as usability, tend to be vague and loose, characteristics that challenge our ability to accumulate and communicate knowledge and to capture real-world phenomena. The second reason involves the nature of the relations between the usability construct and its measures, a topic rarely discussed in HCI research. There appears to be a mismatch between how the HCI community has (implicitly) conceptualized these relations and how it has empirically examined them. The relations have been conceptualized according to a formative measurement model but have mostly been tested according to a reflective measurement model. The trouble is that representing the usability construct by the reflective model appears inappropriate, and representing it by the formative model involves considerable difficulties. Possible ways of addressing these issues are discussed, each with its advantages and drawbacks. I conclude that for scientific research on this subject to progress, the usability construct ought to be unbundled and replaced by well-defined constructs. The issues discussed in this article are relevant to other HCI umbrella concepts and constructs such as user experience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07370024.2017.1298038

Cites

171 of 171 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

9 of the 180 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tractinsky, N.
Affiliations
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Corresponding author
Tractinsky, Noam
Venue
Human–Computer Interaction
Published
2017-05-02
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
131-177
ISSN
  • 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7051
OpenAlex
W2591806671
Cited by
87
References
180
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8
FWCI
13.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human-Computer Interaction (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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ergonomics and Human Factors
Keywords
construct definition, formative measurement model, reflective measurement models, construct validity, usability measures, user experience, HCI theory

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