The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing a Firm's Web Presence: A Heuristic Evaluation Procedure for the Measurement of Usability
Open accessAbstract
Web site usability is a critical metric for assessing the quality of a firm's Web presence. A measure of usability must not only provide a global rating for a specific Web site, ideally it should also illuminate specific strengths and weaknesses associated with site design. In this paper, we describe a heuristic evaluation procedure for examining the usability of Web sites. The procedure utilizes a comprehensive set of usability guidelines developed by Microsoft. We present the categories and subcategories comprising these guidelines, and 7discuss the development of an instrument that operationalizes the measurement of usability. The proposed instrument was tested in a heuristic evaluation study where 1,475 users rated multiple Web sites from four different industry sectors: airlines, online bookstores, automobile manufacturers, and car rental agencies. To enhance the external validity of the study, users were asked to assume the role of a consumer or an investor when assessing usability. Empirical results suggest that the evaluation procedure, the instrument, as well as the usability metric exhibit good properties. Implications of the findings for researchers, for Web site designers, and for heuristic evaluation methods in usability testing are offered.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Venkatesh, V. (2000) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 · Cited by 6,664
Self-citationAgarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250951 · Cited by 4,726
Self-citationA Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x · Cited by 3,802
Self-citationConventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective.
Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305 · Cited by 3,618
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1997) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01322.x · Cited by 1,669
Self-citation
Cited by
Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model1
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036519 · Cited by 8,635
Inexperience and experience with online stores: the importance of TAM and trust
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2003.817277 · Cited by 965
Modeling Web Site Design Across Cultures: Relationships to Trust, Satisfaction, and E-Loyalty
Cyr, D. (2008) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222240402 · Cited by 766
Perceived information quality in data exchanges: Effects on risk, trust, and intention to use
Nicolaou, A. I., & McKnight, D. H. (2006) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0103 · Cited by 682
Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2003.822468 · Cited by 582
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Agarwal, R., & Venkatesh, V.
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 168-186
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W1982214937
- Cited by
- 872
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 43.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.
