Abstract
The System Usability Scale (SUS), developed by Brooke (Usability evaluation in industry, Taylor & Francis, London, pp 189–194, 1996), had a great success among usability practitioners since it is a quick and easy to use measure for collecting users’ usability evaluation of a system. Recently, Lewis and Sauro (Proceedings of the human computer interaction international conference (HCII 2009), San Diego CA, USA, 2009) have proposed a two-factor structure—Usability (8 items) and Learnability (2 items)—suggesting that practitioners might take advantage of these new factors to extract additional information from SUS data. In order to verify the dimensionality in the SUS’ two-component structure, we estimated the parameters and tested with a structural equation model the SUS structure on a sample of 196 university users. Our data indicated that both the unidimensional model and the two-factor model with uncorrelated factors proposed by Lewis and Sauro (Proceedings of the human computer interaction international conference (HCII 2009), San Diego CA, USA, 2009) had a not satisfactory fit to the data. We thus released the hypothesis that Usability and Learnability are independent components of SUS ratings and tested a less restrictive model with correlated factors. This model not only yielded a good fit to the data, but it was also significantly more appropriate to represent the structure of SUS ratings.
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
\( \omega = {\frac{{\left( {\sum {\lambda_{i} } } \right)^{2} }}{{\left( {\sum {\lambda_{i} } } \right)^{2} + \sum {{\text{Var}}\left( {\varepsilon_{i} } \right)} }}} \) where λ i the standardized factor loadings for the factor and Var(ε i ) the error variance associated with the individual indicator variables (both reported in Table 3).
References
Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT (2008) An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Int J Hum Comp Interact 24:574–594
Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107:238–246
Bentler PM (2004) EQS structural equations modeling software (Version 6.1) (Computer software). Multivariate Software, Encino
Brooke J (1996) SUS: a 'quick and dirty' usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 189–194
Browne MW, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 136–162
Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1992) Reliability and validity assessment. SAGE, Beverly Hills
Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ (1999) Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Meth 4:272–299
Hu L, Bentler PM (2004) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55
Kirakowski J (1994) The use of questionnaire methods for usability assessment (unpublished manuscript). http://sumi.ucc.ie/sumipapp.html
Lewis JR, Sauro J (2009) The factor structure of the system usability scale. In: Proceedings of the human computer interaction international conference (HCII 2009), San Diego CA, USA
McDonald RP, Ho MR (2002) Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol Meth 7:64–82
Satorra A, Bentler PM (2001) A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika 66:507–514
Widaman KF, Thompson JS (2003) On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling. Psychol Meth 8:16–37
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Borsci, S., Federici, S. & Lauriola, M. On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: a test of alternative measurement models. Cogn Process 10, 193–197 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-009-0268-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-009-0268-9