CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 141Usability and User Interface DesignPsychometric Methodologies and TestingInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Multi-language toolkit for the system usability scale

Gao, Meiyuzi, Kortum, Philip, Oswald, Frederick L.·2020·International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1080/10447318.2020.1801173
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The System Usability Scale (SUS) is a widely used instrument that measures the subjective usability of products and systems. Although past research has demonstrated the psychometric reliability and criterion-related validity of the SUS in specific languages, the approach and methodology of validating the translations has been somewhat inconsistent. This paper addresses this issue by systematically translating and validating the SUS across multiple languages. Native speakers of Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hindi, and Spanish evaluated five common everyday products using the translated SUS. Evidence of consistent scale reliability and validity was found in the Chinese, French, German and Spanish SUS, with Cronbach’s alpha often greater than .80, as well as large statistically significant correlations between the SUS and a one-item adjective rating self-report of overall usability (r =.54-.74). Validity of the SUS across languages was also demonstrated by finding reliable differences in mean SUS scores between products. Overall, these translated SUS measures can be used with confidence in practice to measure the usability of everyday products and systems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10447318.2020.1801173

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • A study conducted in 2020 examined the Arabic, Chinese, French, German, and Spanish versions of the SUS and found that these versions were adequately adapted; however, cultural differences had to be highlighted.

    “Moreover, a study conducted in 2020 examined the Arabic, Chinese, French, German, and Spanish versions of the SUS [14]. The study found that these SUS versions were adequately adapted; however, cultural differences had to be highlighted [14].”

    From System Usability Scale Benchmarking for Digital Health Apps: Meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [14]

  • Using the SUS, the practicability and usability of an early TONI prototype achieved excellent results (85.2 of a total score of 100 points).

    “Using the SUS (Gao et al., 2020) the practicability and usability of an early TONI prototype achieved excellent results (85,2 of a total score of 100 points).”

    From TONI - One for all? Participatory development of a transtheoretic and transdiagnostic online intervention for blended care (2024) · cites this paper as Gao et al., 2020

  • Using the SUS, participants evaluated an early TONI prototype and it achieved excellent results (83.3 of a total score of 100 points).

    “Using the SUS (Gao et al., 2020), participants also evaluated an early TONI prototype according to its practicability and usability. The prototype achieved excellent results (83,3 of a total score of 100 points).”

    From TONI - One for all? Participatory development of a transtheoretic and transdiagnostic online intervention for blended care (2024) · cites this paper as Gao et al., 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gao, M., Kortum, P., & Oswald, F. L.
Affiliations
Rice University (US)
Corresponding author
Kortum, Philip
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-08-19
Volume
36
Issue
20
Pages
1883-1901
ISSN
  • 1044-7318 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7590
DOI
10.1080/10447318.2020.1801173
OpenAlex
W3062812444
Cited by
140
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 8
FWCI
9.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
System Usability Scale, usability measurement, cross-lingual translation, psychometric validation, scale reliability, criterion validity, everyday products, Arabic language, Chinese, French language, German, Hindi, Spanish language

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