Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Crucial web usability factors of 36 industries for students: a large-scale empirical study

  • Published:
Electronic Commerce Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study identifies and prioritizes the crucial Web Usability Factors (WUFs) for websites from 36 industries. 400 respondents participated in the web evaluation and more than 12,000 data points were collected and analyzed using Multiple Linear Regression. Seven WUFs were tested, i.e. Use of Color and Font, Use of Graphics and Multimedia, Clarity of Goals in Website, Trustworthiness of Website, Interactivity of Website, Ease of Web Navigation, and Downloading Speed of Website. Results reveal that every industry has a different set of crucial WUFs. The research compared and discussed its results with previous studies such as Agarwal and Venkatesh (Inf. Syst. Res. 13:168–186, 2002). Moreover, students’ preference for Web usability was compared with that of general Internet users. The study provides a simple method to measure web usability and to determine which WUFs are important for a specific industry with consideration of the users’ role. Practitioners can use the results as a guide to design usable websites for specific industry. This study is the first that comprehensively examines the WUFs of students by employing a very large sample size across various industries, thus yielding more specific and meaningful results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24, 665–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Agarwal, R., & Venkatesh, V. (2002). Assessing a firm’s web presence: a heuristic evaluation procedure for the measurement of usability. Information Systems Research, 13, 168–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Albers, J. (2009). When marketing merges with learning, customers profit. T + D. Alexandria, 63(6), 72–75.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Brady, L., & Phillips, C. (2003). Aesthetics and usability: a look at color and balance. Usability News (Vol. 5.1). Available at: http://www.surl.org/usabilitynews/51/aesthetics.asp. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  7. Brynjolfsson, E., & Smith, M. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of Internet conventional retailers. Management Science, 46, 563–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Burns, E. (2006). Funny, Multi-Channel Campaigns reach college students. The Clickz Network, July 20, 2006. Available at: http://www.clickz.com/3622907. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  9. Cao, M., Zhang, Q., & Seydel, J. (2005). B2C e-commerce web site quality: an empirical examination. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(5), 645–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cappel, J. J., & Huang, Z. (2007). A usability analysis of company websites. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(1), 117.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Card, S., Moran, T., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chau, P. Y. K., Au, G., & Tam, K. Y. (2000). Impact of information presentation modes on online shopping: an empirical evaluation of broadband interactive shopping service. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 10, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen, B., Wang, H., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (1997). A human-centered approach for designed world-wide-web browsers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 29, 172–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Copas, G. M. (2003). Can Internet shoppers be described by personality traits? Usability News, Vol. 5.1, available at: http://www.surl.org/usabilitynews/51/personality.asp. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  15. Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2005). The asymmetric impact of web site attribute performance on user satisfaction: an empirical study. In Proceedings of the Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Big Island, Hawaii, January 3–6, 2005.

  16. Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (1993). Human computer interaction. United Kingdom: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ezquerra, N., Braal, L., Garcia, Cooke, C., & Krawczynska, E. (1999). Interactive, knowledge-guided visualization of 3D medical imagery. Future Generation Computer Systems, 15, 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ferney, S. L., & Marshall’, A. L. (2006). Website physical activity interventions: preferences of potential users. Health Education Research, 21(4), 560–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Flavian, C., & Guinaliu, M. (2006). Consumer trust, perceived security and privacy policy. Three basic elements of loyalty to a web site. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 106(5), 601–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frøkjær, E., & Hornbæk, K. (2008). Metaphors of human thinking for usability inspection and design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 14(4), 20.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Garson, D. G. (2009). Multiple Regression. Available at: http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/regress.htm#dummyb. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  22. Gehrke, D., & Turban, E. (1999). Determinants of successful website design: relative importance and recommendations for effectiveness. In Proceedings of 31st Hawaii international conference of information systems, Maui, HI, USA.

  23. Ginige, A., & Murugesan, S. (2001). The essence of web engineering—managing the diversity and complexity of web application development. IEEE Multimedia, 8, 22–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Google (2010). Corporate information. Available at: http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html, Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  25. Greenspan, R. (2003). College students surf, spend. ClickZ Network, February 13, 2003. Available at: http://www.clickz.com/1583871. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  26. Greenspan, R. (2004). Online Asians lead in income, E-commerce. ClickZ Network, March 15, 2004. Available at: http://www.clickz.com/3326041. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  27. Helander, M. G. (2000). Theories and models of electronic commerce. In Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 congress (Vol. 2, pp. 770–773).

  28. Hix, D., & Hartson, H. R. (1993). Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product and process. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60, 50–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the Internet become indispensable? Communication of the ACM, 47, 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Isen, A. M. (1993). Positive affect and decision-making. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 261–277). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  32. ISO 9241-11 (1998). Ergonomics requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), part 11: guidance on usability.

  33. Iwaarden, J., Wiele, T., Ball, L., & Millen, R. (2003). Applying SERVQUAL to web sites: an exploratory study. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 20, 919–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Iwaarden, J., Wiele, T., Ball, L., & Millen, R. (2004). Perceptions about the quality of websites: a survey amongst students at Northeastern University and Erasmus University. Information & Management, 41, 947–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. John, B., & Kieras, D. E. (1996). Using GOMS for user interface design and evaluation: which technique? ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 4, 287–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jørgensen (1990). Thinking-aloud in user interface design: a method promoting cognitive ergonomic. Ergonomics, 33(4), 501–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kateratattanakul, P., & Siau, K. (1999). Measuring information quality of websites: development of an instrument. In P. De & J. DeGross (Eds.), Proceedings of 20th international conference of information systems (pp. 279–285), Charlotte, NC, USA.

  38. Kantner, L., & Rosenbaum, S. (1997). Usability studies of WWW sites: heuristic evaluation vs. laboratory testing. In Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on computer documentation (pp. 153–160), Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.

  39. Keevil, B. (1998). Measuring the usability index of your website. In Proceedings of the sixteenth annual conference ACM international conference of computer documentation (pp. 271–277), Quebec, Canada, September 24–26.

  40. Kelly, Wacholder, Rittman, Sun, Kantor, Small, & Strzalkowski (2007). Using interview data to identify evaluation criteria for interactive, analytical question-answering system. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kieras, D. E. (1997). A Guide to GOMS model usability evaluation using NGOMSL. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed.) (pp. 733–766). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Kieras, D. E. (1998). A guide to GOMS model usability evaluation using GOMSL and GLEAN3. (Technical Report No. 38, TR-98/ARPA-2). Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department. January 2, 1998.

  43. Kinzie, M. B., Cohn, W. F., Julian, M. F., & Knaus, W. A. (2002). A user-centered model for web site design. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association, 9, 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Krug, S. (2006). Don’t make me think, second edition: a common sense approach to web usability. New York: Pearson Education Inc. and New Riders Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kumar, R. L., Smith, M. A., & Bannerjee, S. (2004). User interface features influencing overall ease of use and personalization. Information & Management, 41, 289–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kirakowski, J., Claridge, N., & Whitehand, R. (1998). Human centered measures of success in web site design. In Proceedings of the 4th conference on human factors & the web, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA, June 5, 1998.

  47. Lecerof, A., & Paterno, F. (1998). Automatic support for usability evaluation. IEEE Transaction Software Engineering, 24, 863–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lewis, Polson, Wharton, & Rieman (1990). Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 235–242), Seattle, WA, USA.

  49. Liu, C., & Arnett, K. P. (2000). Exploring the factors associated with website success in the context of electronic commerce. Information & Management, 38, 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lindgaard, G. (1999). Does emotional appeal determine perceived usability of web sites. In L. Straker & C. Pollock (Eds.), Proceedings of CybErg: the second international cyberspace conference on ergonomics (pp. 202–211). Perth, Western Australia: The International Ergonomics Association Press, Curtin University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Lohse, G., & Spiller, P. (1999). Internet retail store design: how the user interface influences traffic and sales. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5.

  52. Looney, M., & Lyman, P. (2000). Portals in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review, July/August 2000.

  53. Marcus, A. (2005). User interface design’s return on investment: examples and statistics. In R. G. Bias & D. J. Mayhew (Eds.), Cost-justifying usability. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing research: an applied orientation (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  55. McMullen (2001). Usability testing in a library web site redesign project. Reference Services Review, 29, 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Motulsky, H. (1995). Intuitive biostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Nathan, R. J. (2009). Electronic commerce adoption in the Arab countries—an empirical study. International Arab Journal of e-Technology, 1(1), 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Nathan, R. J., & Yeow, P. H. P. (2009). An empirical study of factors affecting the usability of websites for student Internet users. Universal Access in the Information Society, 8(3).

  59. Nathan, R. J., Yeow, P. H. P., & Murugesan, S. (2008). Key usability factors of service-oriented web sites for students: an empirical study. Online Information Review, 32(3), 302–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development (MED) (2000). E-commerce: a guide for new zealand business. New Zealand MED: Wellington.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Norman, D. A. (2002). Emotion and design: attractive things work better. Interaction Magazine, 9, 36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Nielsen, J. (1994). Heuristic evaluation. In J. Nielsen & R. L. Mack (Eds.), Usability inspection methods. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability: the practice of simplicity. Indianapolis: New Riders.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Nielsen, J., & Tahir, M. (2002). Homepage usability: 50 web sites deconstructed. Indianapolis: New Riders.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Nielsen, J. (2003). Usability 101: introduction to usability, Jakob Nielsen’s alertbox. Available at: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  66. Nielsen, J. (2005). Useit.com: Jakob Nielsen’s website. Available at: http://www.useit.com/. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  67. O’Connor, B. P. (1998). All-in-one programs for exploring interactions in moderated multiple regression. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 833–837.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Olson, & Olson (1990). The growth of cognitive modeling in human-computer interaction since GOMS. Human-Computer Interaction, 5(2), 221–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Pavlou, P. A., & Chai, L. (2002). What drives electronic commerce across cultures? A cross-cultural empirical investigation of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 3(2), 240–253.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Pastore, M. (2000). US college students use net for shopping. Click Z Network, August 8, 2000. Available at: http://www.clickz.com/432631. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  71. Pennington, R., Wilcox, H. D., & Grover, V. (2003). The role of system trust in business-to-consumer transactions. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 197–226.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Phillips, A., & Chaparro, A. (2009). Visual appeal vs. usability: which one influences user perceptions of a website more? Usability News (Vol. 11.2). Available at: http://www.surl.org/usabilitynews/112/aesthetic.asp, Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  73. Rigby, E. (2004). Usability can work for all online marketers. In Revolution (p. 56).

  74. Rivero, M. (1999). Web objectives save time, money. New Hampshire Business Review, 21, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Robins, D., & Holmes, J. (2008). Aesthetics and credibility in web site design. Information Processing & Management, 44(1), 386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Sharma, S., Durand, R. M., & Gurarie, O. (1981). Identification and analysis of moderator variables. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 45–57.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Shenkman, B. O., & Jonsson, F. (2000). Aesthetics and preferences of web pages. Behavior and Information Technology, 19, 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Snider, J. G., & Osgood, C. E. (1969). Semantic differential technique: a source book. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Stark, J., & Meier, R. (2001). A longitudinal study of usage and satisfaction levels of Internet shopping by college students. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41, 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  81. StatSoft (2008). Nonparametric Statistics. Online Available: http://www.statsoft.com/TEXTBOOK/stnonpar.html. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  82. Teo, H. H., Oh, L. B., Lui, C., & Wei, K. K. (2003). An empirical study of the effects of interactivity on web user attitude. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 281–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Tilson, R., Dong, J., Martin, S., & Kieche, E. (1998). Factors and principles affecting the usability of four E-Commerce sites. In Proceedings of human factors and the web, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA, June 5, 1998.

  84. Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13, 127–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Turban, E., King, D., Lee, J., Warkentin, M., & Chung, H. M. (2002). Electronic commerce 2002—a managerial perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Turban, E., King, D., Viehland, D., & Lee, J. (2006). Electronic commerce—a managerial perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Usability First (2005). Usability in website and software design. Usability First. Available at: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/methods/index.txl. Retrieved: January 8, 2010.

  88. Watson, R. T., Berthon, P., Pitt, L. F., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2000). Electronic commerce: the strategic perspective. Fort Worth: Dryden.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business and Law, Multimedia University, Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, 75450, Melaka, Malaysia

    Robert J. Nathan

  2. School of Business, Monash University, Sunway Campus, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, 46150, Bandar Sunway, Selangor, Malaysia

    Paul H. P. Yeow

Authors
  1. Robert J. Nathan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul H. P. Yeow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul H. P. Yeow.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nathan, R.J., Yeow, P.H.P. Crucial web usability factors of 36 industries for students: a large-scale empirical study. Electron Commer Res 11, 151–180 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-010-9054-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-010-9054-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation