Mesure de la sensibilité et de la signification de la version française du System Usability Scale: Measuring the sensitivity and significance of the French version of the System Usability Scale
Article No.: 2, Pages 1 - 13
Abstract
The System Usability Scale (SUS) is the most widely cited and most widely used of the User Experience Scales (UX). To date, there is no scientifically validated translation into French of this scale. This article therefore proposes to use a first French version of the SUS, the F-SUS, to measure its sensitivity and meaning. The sensitivity of the F-SUS was studied by applying it to 11 different interactive systems (websites, mobile application, expert systems), with 439 users. The scores of these systems were compared in order to verify that they were sufficiently differentiated. The measure of significance was to replicate the Bangor et al (2008) study, asking F-SUS respondents to qualify the system they were assessing using 7 adjectives. These adjectives were then positioned on the overall F-SUS score out of 100.
Pourtant la plus citée et la plus utilisée parmi les échelles de mesure de l'expérience utilisateur (UX), l’échelle System Usability Scale (SUS) ne possède pas à ce jour de traduction validée scientifiquement en français. Cet article propose ainsi de s'appuyer sur une première version française du SUS, le F-SUS, pour mesurer sa sensibilité et sa signification. La sensibilité du F-SUS a été étudiée en l'appliquant à 11 systèmes interactifs différents (sites web, application mobile, systèmes experts), auprès de 439 utilisateurs. Les scores de ces systèmes ont été comparés afin de vérifier qu'ils se différenciaient suffisamment. La mesure de la signification a consisté à répliquer l’étude de Bangor et al. (2008), en demandant aux répondants du F-SUS de qualifier le système qu'ils évaluaient à l'aide de 7 adjectifs qualificatifs. Ces adjectifs ont ensuite été positionnés par rapport au score global, sur 100, du F-SUS.
References
[1]
. Adinda, P.P. and Suzianti, A. Redesign of user interface for E-government application using usability testing method. ICCIP, (2018), 145–149.
[2]
. AlGhannam, B.A., Albustan, S.A., Al-Hassan, A.A., and Albustan, L.A. Towards a Standard Arabic System Usability Scale: Psychometric Evaluation using Communication Disorder App. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 34, 9 (2018), 799–804.
[3]
. Bangor, A., Kortum, P., and Miller, J. Determining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of usability studies 4, 3 (2009), 114–123.
[4]
. Bangor, A., Kortum, P.T., and Miller, J.T. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 24, 6 (2008), 574–594.
[5]
. Baumgartner, J., Frei, N., Kleinke, M., Sauer, J., and Sonderegger, A. Pictorial System Usability Scale (P-SUS): Developing an instrument for measuring perceived usability. CHI 2019, May 4–9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, (2019), 1–11.
[6]
. Berke, L., Huenerfauth, M., and Patel, K. Design and psychometric evaluation of American sign language translations of usability questionnaires. ASSETS’17, Oct. 29–Nov. 1, 2017, Baltimore, MD, USA, (2017), 175–184.
[7]
. Beul-Leusmann, S., Samsel, C., Wiederhold, M., Krempels, K.H., Jakobs, E.M., and Ziefle, M. Usability evaluation of mobile passenger information systems. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). 2014, 217–228.
[8]
. Bilgihan, A. Gen y customer loyalty in online shopping: An integrated model of trust, user experience and branding. Computers in Human Behavior 61, (2016), 103–113.
[9]
. Blažica, B. and Lewis, J.R. A Slovene Translation of the System Usability Scale: The SUS-SI. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 31, 2 (2015), 112–117.
[10]
. Borkowska, A. and Jach, K. Pre-testing of polish translation of system usability scale (SUS). In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2017, 143–153.
[11]
. Borsci, S., Federici, S., and Lauriola, M. On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: A test of alternative measurement models. Cognitive Processing 10, 3 (2009), 193–197.
[12]
. Brangier, E., Dufresne, A., and Hammes-Adelé, S. Approche symbiotique de la relation humain-technologie: perspectives pour l'ergonomie informatique. Le Travail Humain 74, 4 (2009), 333–353.
[13]
. Brooke. SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P.W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B.A. Weerdmeester and I. McClelland, eds., Usability evaluation in industry. London: Taylor & Francis, 1996, 189–194.
[14]
. Brooke, J. SUS: A Retrospective. Journal of Usability Studies 8, 2 (2013), 29–40.
[15]
. Cattell, R.B. The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1, 2 (1966), 245–276.
[16]
. Dianat, I., Ghanbari, Z., and AsghariJafarabadi, M. Psychometric properties of the persian language version of the system usability scale. Health promotion perspectives 4, 1 (2014), 82–829.
[17]
. Finstad, K. The usability metric for user experience. Interacting with Computers 22, 5 (2010), 323–327.
[18]
. Gronier, G. and Baudet, A. Psychometric evaluation of the F-SUS: Creation and validation of the French version of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, .
[19]
. Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., and Koller, F. AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In G. Szwillus and J. Ziegler, eds., Mensch & Computer 2003: Interaktion in Bewegung. 2003, 187–196.
[20]
. Hornbaek, K. Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64, 2 (2006), 79–102.
[21]
. Hussain, A., Mkpojiogu, E.O.C., and Hussain, Z. Usability evaluation of a web-based health awareness portal on smartphone devices using ISO 9241-11 model. Jurnal Teknologi 77, 4 (2015), 1–5.
[22]
. ISO 16982:2002. Méthodes d'utilisabilité pour la conception centrée sur l'opérateur humain. 2002.
[23]
. ISO 9241-11:1998. Exigences ergonomiques pour travail de bureaux avec terminaux à écrans de visualisation. Partie 11: Lignes directrices concernant l'utilisabilité. 1998.
[24]
. Katsanos, C., Tselios, N., and Xenos, M. Perceived usability evaluation of learning management systems: A first step towards standardization of the system usability scale in Greek. Proceedings of the 2012 16th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, PCI 2012, Piraeus, Greece: IEEE CPS, 5-7 Oct., 2012, (2012), 302–307.
[25]
. Kortum, P.T. and Bangor, A. Usability Ratings for Everyday Products Measured With the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29, 2 (2013), 67–76.
[26]
. Lallemand, C. and Gronier, G. Méthodes de Design UX. 30 méthodes fondamentales pour concevoir des expériences optimales. Paris, 2018.
[27]
. Lallemand, C., Koenig, V., Gronier, G., and Martin, R. Création et validation d'une version française du questionnaire AttrakDiff pour l’évaluation de l'expérience utilisateur des systèmes interactifs. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology 65, 5 (2015), 239–252.
[28]
. Landauer, T.K. Chapter 9 - Behavioral Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (Second Edition). 1997, 203–227.
[29]
. Larue, V. Apport du System Usability Scale à l'activité d'ergonomie d’évaluation. IHM 2009, 13-16 Octobre 2009, Grenoble, France, (2009), 155–161.
[30]
. Lewis, J., Utesch, B., and Maher, D. UMUX-LITE: when there's no time for the SUS. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Computer Interaction, (2013), 2099–2102.
[31]
. Lewis, J.R. The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 34, 7 (2018), 577–590.
[32]
. Lewis, J.R. and Sauro, J. The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale. Human Centered Design, First International Conference, HCD 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, (2009), 26–31.
[33]
. Lewis, J.R. and Sauro, J. Revisiting the Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale. Journal of Usability Studies 12, 4 (2017), 183–192.
[34]
. Maguire, M. Methods to support human-centred design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 55, 4 (2001), 587–634.
[35]
. Martins, A.I., Rosa, A.F., Queirós, A., Silva, A., and Rocha, N.P. European Portuguese Validation of the System Usability Scale (SUS). Procedia Computer Science 67, Dsai (2015), 293–300.
[36]
. Nunnally, J.C. An Overview of Psychological Measurement. In B.B. Wolman, ed., Clinical Diagnosis of Mental Disorders. New York, 1978, 97–146.
[37]
. Peruri, A., Borchert, O., Cox, K., Hokanson, G., and Slator, B.M. Using the system usability scale in a classification learning environment. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2017, 167–176.
[38]
. Roto, V., Law, E., Vermeeren, A., and Hoonhout, J. User Experience White Paper. Bringing clarity to the concept of user experience. 2010.
[39]
. Rummel, B. System Usability Scale – jetzt auch auf Deutsch. 2015. System Usability Scale – jetzt auch auf Deutsch.
[40]
. Sauro, J. and Lewis, J.R. When designing usability questionnaires, does it hurt to be positive? Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, (2011), 2215–2223.
[41]
. Sauro, J. and Lewis, J.R. Quantifying the User Experience. Elsevier, 2012.
[42]
. Sharfina, Z. and Santoso, H.B. An Indonesian adaptation of the System Usability Scale (SUS). 2016 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems, ICACSIS 2016, (2016), 145–148.
[43]
. South, H., Taylor, M., Dogan, H., and Jiang, N. Digitising a medical clerking system with multimodal interaction support. ICMI 2017 - Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction 2017-Janua, (2017), 238–242.
[44]
. Tolentino, G.P., Battaglini, C., Pereira, A.C.V., De Oliveria, R.J., and De Paula, M.G.M. Usability of serious games for health. Proceedings - 2011 3rd International Conferenceon Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications, VS-Games 2011, (2011), 172–175.
[45]
. Vallerand, R.J. Vers une méthodologie de validation trans-culturelle de questionnaires psychologiques: Implications pour la recherche en langue française. Psychologie Canadienne 30, 4 (1989), 662–680.
[46]
. Yang, D., Zhang, D., Chen, L., and Qu, B. NationTelescope: Monitoring and visualizing large-scale collective behavior in LBSNs. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 55, August (2015), 170–180.
Recommendations
Méthode de mesure de la chaleur spécifique par température croissante ou décroissante
RésuméL'obtention des valeurs expérimentales de l'entropie, à l'équilibre, à partir des grandeurs thermiques, est rendue compliquée pour un supraconducteur se trouvant dans une phase mélangée, mixte ou intermédiaire, par le comportement irréversible ...
Robots collaboratifs dans l’industrie française en 2021 : acceptation des opérateurs et points de vue d’industriels.
IHM '23: Proceedings of the 34th Conference on l'Interaction Humain-MachineCette étude aborde différentes thématiques autour de l’état de l’acceptation de la cobotique dans le monde industriel français, notamment par le biais d’un questionnaire en ligne auprès des opérateurs utilisant des cobots dans leur activité ...
Mesure de l'integrale de dirichlet et ses applications
La connaissance de l'integrale de Dirichlet est utile dans de nombreux problemes, dont la perturbation induite par des cavites dans un reacteur nucleaire. Une methode analytique adaptee aux cavites cylindriques de forme arbitraire est proposee ainsi qu'...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
April 2021
208 pages
ISBN:9781450383622
DOI:10.1145/3450522
Copyright © 2021 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
In-Cooperation
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 13 January 2022
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
IHM '21
IHM '21: IHM '21 - 32e Conférence Francophone sur l'Interaction Homme-Machine
April 13 - 16, 2021
Virtual Event, France
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 103 of 199 submissions, 52%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 1,271Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)595
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)60
Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in