Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the Urdu Language

Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the
Urdu Language
Hooria Anam
Department of Computer Science
COMSATS University Islamabad
Sahiwal, Pakistan
hooriaanam38@gmail.com
Mazhar Sadiq
Sahiwal, Pakistan
masadiq@cuisahiwal.edu.pk
Haris Jamil
Sahiwal, Pakistan
harisjamil317@gmail.com
Abstract— System usability scale (SUS) is a quick and effective
approach to evaluate the usability of a product. SUS is a low
expense usability scale which can be employed for the assessment
of interactive systems. SUS was originally developed in English
but many researchers have mentioned that participants answer
more effectively when the SUS scale has been developed in their
mother language instead of English. So, there is a need for its
Urdu translation for native Urdu speakers. In this research, we
have developed the Urdu version of the SUS and its reliability
compared with the original English scale. Forward and backward
translation technique is used to translate it. Data was collected by
using Google Forms. A total of 170 people participated in the
survey. Results are formulated by using the SPSS Statistics tool.
The reliability of the English version is 0.717 and for the Urdu
version, it is 0.835. High reliability of the Urdu version indicates
that people understand this scale better as compared to English.
It also shows that this scale can be used by usability practitioners
in Pakistan.
Keywords- usability; system usability scale; sus; urdu;
reliability; validity
I. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, the use of software and apps has become
prevalent in our society. Technology is spreading very quickly,
and it has become essential to develop a quality model.
However, how do we examine the quality of a system or app?
The answer is Usability. The system usability technique's key
purpose is to improve the user interface (UI) for a better end-
user experience so that the user gets maximum outcomes of the
system [1]. Poorly designed systems may result in stress,
frustration, and waste of time [2].
Usability is defined as “The extent to which a product can
be used by specified users to achieve specific goals with
effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction in a specified context of
use”(ISO, 1998)”. Usability is a crucial feature of product
design [3].
Literature has provided different usability evaluation
approaches and tools [4]. Some of them are only applicable to a
specific system or development phase. For example, some
evaluation tools like Hallway Testing, Remote Usability
Testing, Expert Review, A/B testing. In hallway testing, people
passing by hallway are asked to use the product and answer the
questions.
One by one, product testing is a difficult and time taking
method to measure Usability when samples are in a large
number. Similarly, in remote usability testing, cultural and
linguistic barriers did not provide relevant results. Moreover,
A/B testing is an experimental approach that requires a specific
version of the product for testing. So, it is not easy to adopt a
specific usability evaluation method [5] (Hayat, Lock, &
Murray, 2015). There are many usability testing methods
available, but one of the most commonly used testing methods
is using a questionnaire.
Questionnaires are an easy and cheap method to test
Usability. The questionnaires provide a way to understand the
user's perspective clearly [6]. Likert-type questionnaires are
used to measure subjective user attitudes. They give results
through a standardized statistical process [7]. They interpret
how exactly a user likes or dislikes a system.
There are some standardized usability measurement
questionnaires such as Computer System Usability
Questionnaire (CSUQ) [8], Questionnaire for User Interface
Satisfaction (QUIS) [9], and System Usability Scale (SUS)
[10], and so on. QUIS has 27 questions; each question is a
rating on a ten-point scale with an appropriate anchor at the
end.
Similarly, CSUQ is based on 19 questions each question
further has 7 point rating statements from "Strongly Disagree"
to "Strongly Agree." The SUS is the most widely used
questionnaire as a standard [11] cited in more than 1200
Publications and included in commercial usability toolkits.
Brooke developed SUS in 1986. SUS is a Likert type scale,
consisting of 10 questions (Brooke, 1996). Odd numbers
represent positive statements and vice versa. Each question
further has five rating points from "Strongly Disagree" to
"Strongly Agree." It is a customizable scale that can be
supervised through survey tools like Survey Monkey, Google
Forms, Qualtrics, and many others. As compared to other
questionnaires, it is short and has high reliability of 0.91 [12].
This usability scale is free to use and can be easily accessed to
get valid results. It produces acceptable results even with the
less number of samples [13].
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS),
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
73 https://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500

Previous studies have documented the use of SUS for many
different products and systems, including websites [14], voice-
response systems [15], desktop applications, mobile apps [16],
and various consumer products [17]. It ranges from 1 to 100,
where the average is 68 [18]. For an acceptable product, the
scale should be above 70 as a result measurement [19].
The system usability technique's primary purpose is to
improve the user interface (UI) for a better end-user experience
so that the user gets maximum outcomes of the system [20].
SUS provides more valid results when people fill the
questionnaire in their native language. Previous studies
illustrate that people feel comfortable understanding the
context of a sentence when it is in their language [21]. SUS is
translated into different languages. It has been adopted in
various languages, but there is no study reporting its translation
into Urdu.
Responses that participants provide in their native language
increase the scale's reliability. The translated scale gives better
results and understanding as compared to the original scale
when translated according to culture. This research aims to
translate the SUS (EN) into SUS (UR), which can be
understandable for the native Urdu speakers of Pakistan.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
System Usability Scale is the most widely used tool for
measuring Usability. It is now not limited to English native
speakers only. The people of different cultural and non-English
speakers may face difficulty understanding the scale unless
translated into their language. So, the translation of the scale in
the local language is essential. These translated versions
provide considerable and reliable results. SUS was initially
developed in English. Today, there are many official and
unofficial SUS translations that exist. Several translations have
been made in different languages with the highest reliability of
0.85, with the highest validity index of 0.91.
In Slovenian [22] translation a Gmail app was used and an
online survey was conducted with 182 participants. The
audience used to evaluate this scale was the native speaker of
Slovenia. The reliability of this translation was 0.81. In Persian
[23] and Arabic [24] translations, this scale was used to
evaluate the psychometric properties. In Persian, there were
202 university students from the Tabriz University of Medical
Sciences, Iran. The system tested for Usability was the food
reservation system of the university. The reliability of this scale
is 0.79. Similarly, in the Arabic version, a communication
disorder app was tested at Kuwait University, including 90
participants. The reliability of this Arabic SUS scale was 0.8.
Moreover, in European Portuguese [25] translation, two
phases were applied; the first one is to translate the scale, and
in the second phase, reliability and validity of the scale have
been determined. The reliability of this version is 0.70. In 2020
Khalid S. Al-Tahat has used the Arabic [26] scale to evaluate
the Usability Metric for User Experience (UMUX); this is
further the use of the Arabic scale. Previously, this was used
for a university to calculate the Usability of a disorder app.
Furthermore, in Turkish [27] scale forward and backward
translation technique is used that has proved a better result
approach. A student information system was evaluated after
translating this scale. There were 324 participants, and the
reliability was 0.7. Indonesian scale [28] provides a cross-
cultural adaptation and evaluation of the scale. In the
Indonesian translation method, a face validity app was
evaluated by students of the Computer Science department
from Indonesian universities. The reliability of this adaptation
was 0.841.
In Malay [29], a Malaysian translation was conducted to
evaluate the mobile phone apps. Validity and cross-cultural
adaptation were also included in this version. However, the
reliability, as compared to other translations, is the highest one
at 0.85. These translations tell from the results that participants
respond better in their native language. Moreover, Sri Lankan
[30] translation was made on local languages to identify the
perceived Usability of the different case studies.
From all of the above translations, there is a lack of Urdu
translation of the SUS scale. Therefore, in this study, we are
going to contribute to the translation of the SUS scale and
calculate its reliability.
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research methodology consists of 2 phases:
Translation phase and the Data Collection phase.
A. Translation method
In the translation process forward and Backward
Translation techniques are used. In the first phase, we
translated the original SUS into Urdu and then back to English
to assure the context and meaning of the questionnaire. To
pursue translating the SUS into SUS-Urdu, four translators are
used that are native speakers of Urdu and an English professor
who can understand both English and Urdu. The first two
translators translated the SUS into Urdu individually. After
that, the native Urdu and English speakers validate the context
of the first two translations. In the end, the SUS (output) is
back-translated into English (Original SUS) as shown in Figure
1. Back translated SUS then compared to the original SUS and
finalized Urdu version is developed as shown in Figure 2. At
the end application of the questionnaire and translation is
finalized.
The Flow of the translation process:
Figure 1 Forward and Backward Translation Process
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
ISSN 1947-5500

Figure 2 Comparison with Original SUS
Here in table 1, different versions of Urdu translation against
one item is shown, these are made by different expert
translators:
Original SUS item Expected translations
versions
Final translation
version
I found this portal very
cumbersome/ awkward
to use.
‫م‬‫يں‬‫کو‬ ‫نظام‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬
‫ک‬ ‫استعمال‬‫يلئے‬‫عج‬ ‫بہت‬‫ي‬‫ب‬
‫پا‬‫يا‬ .
‫ميں‬‫کو‬ ‫نظام‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬
‫ل‬ ‫کے‬ ‫کرنے‬ ‫استعمال‬‫يے‬‫ب‬‫ہت‬
‫پا‬ ‫بوجھل‬‫يا‬ .
‫ک‬ ‫استعمال‬‫يلئے‬‫بوج‬ ‫بہت‬‫ھل‬
‫پا‬‫يا‬ .
‫ک‬ ‫استعمال‬‫يلئے‬‫پ‬ ‫ناموزوں‬‫ا‬‫يا‬ .
‫ميں‬‫کو‬ ‫نظام‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬‫استعمال‬
‫ک‬‫يلئے‬‫پا‬ ‫نامناسب‬‫يا‬
‫م‬‫يں‬‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫نظام‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬
‫ل‬ ‫کے‬ ‫کرنے‬‫يے‬‫بوجھ‬ ‫بہت‬‫ل‬
‫پا‬‫يا‬ -
Table 1 Expected and Final Translation Sample Against One
Item
After the back translation the final version of the complete
questionnaire was as shown in Table 2:
Final Translation Version:
SUS- EN SUS-UR
I think that I would like to use this
portal frequently.
‫م‬‫يں‬‫ل‬ ‫کے‬ ‫کرنے‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫نظام‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬‫ي‬‫ے‬
‫پا‬ ‫بوجھل‬ ‫بہت‬‫يا‬ -
I found this portal unnecessarily
complex.
‫م‬‫يں‬‫غ‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫اس‬ ‫نے‬‫ير‬‫ضرور‬‫ی‬‫پر‬ ‫طور‬
‫پا‬ ‫مشکل‬‫يا‬‫۔‬
I thought this portal was easy to use. ‫م‬‫يرا‬‫خ‬‫يال‬‫کہ‬ ‫تھا‬‫يہ‬‫آ‬ ‫کرنا‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫پورٹل‬‫سان‬
‫ہے۔‬
I think that I would need assistance to
be able to use this portal.
‫م‬‫يرا‬‫خ‬‫يال‬‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫مجھے‬ ‫کہ‬ ‫ہے‬
‫کس‬ ‫لئے‬ ‫کے‬ ‫کرنے‬‫ی‬‫ک‬ ‫شخص‬ ‫مند‬ ‫ہنر‬‫ی‬
‫گ‬ ‫پﮍے‬ ‫ضرورت‬‫ی‬‫۔‬
I found the various functions in this
portal were well integrated.
‫م‬‫يں‬‫م‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫نے‬‫يں‬‫کو‬ ‫فنکشنز‬ ‫سے‬ ‫بہت‬‫مکمل‬
‫طر‬‫يقے‬‫پا‬ ‫کرتا‬ ‫کام‬ ‫سے‬‫يا‬‫۔‬
I thought there was too much ‫م‬‫يرا‬‫خ‬‫يال‬‫م‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫کہ‬ ‫تھا‬‫يں‬‫ز‬ ‫بہت‬‫ياده‬‫بے‬
inconsistency in this portal. ‫ضابطگ‬‫ياں‬‫تھ‬‫يں‬‫۔‬
I would imagine that most people
would learn to use this portal very
quickly.
‫م‬‫يرے‬‫خ‬‫يال‬‫م‬‫يں‬‫ز‬‫ياده‬‫آسان‬ ‫لوگ‬ ‫تر‬‫ی‬‫سے‬
‫س‬ ‫کرنا‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬‫يکھ‬‫جائ‬‫يں‬‫گے‬‫۔‬
I found this portal very cumbersome/
awkward to use.
‫م‬‫يں‬‫لئ‬ ‫کے‬ ‫کرنے‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫نے‬‫بہت‬ ‫ے‬
‫پا‬ ‫بوجھل‬‫يا‬‫۔‬
I felt very confident using this portal. ‫م‬‫يں‬‫ب‬ ‫ہوئے‬ ‫کرتے‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫نے‬‫ہت‬
‫ک‬ ‫محسوس‬ ‫پراعتماد‬‫يا‬‫۔‬
I needed to learn a lot of things before
I could get going with this portal.
‫پہلے‬ ‫سے‬ ‫کرنے‬ ‫استعمال‬ ‫کو‬ ‫پورٹل‬ ‫مجھے‬‫بہت‬
‫س‬‫ی‬‫چ‬‫يزوں‬‫س‬ ‫کو‬‫يکھنا‬‫گا۔‬ ‫پﮍے‬
Table 2 Original SUS-EN and the Translated SUS-UR
B. Data Collection
Data collection involves the participants and the
experiment materials.
B.I Study Participants
We have used two questionnaires one is the original
English SUS and the second one is the translated Urdu
version. The data was collected from the e-Rozgaar (an
initiative of PITB Punjab Information Technology Board)
centers, situated in different cities of Pakistan. A total of
170 students from 4 centers participated in this survey. All
of the participants graduated and are well aware of
computers and browsing.
The responses of both questionnaires were collected
through Google forms.
A total of 170 participants were there, ranging between 18
to 44. 37% are between 18-24, 56% are 25-34 and 7% are
between 35-44 as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 Age Graph of Participants
As shown in Figure 4 and 5, Out of 170 participants, 77
were the students of Undergraduate, 85 were of Graduate and 8
were of Postgraduate. There were 79 Females and 91 Males
who filled up both questionnaires.
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
ISSN 1947-5500

Figure 4 Education Graph of Participants
Figure 5 Male and Female Participants
B.II Experimental Design and Materials
The Kortum and Bangor assessment method [31] is used
for the item evaluation. We used the e-Rozgaar student portal
website for usability testing. As the participants are familiar
with the site they filled up the form with the provided
instructions. They have provided their responses for both
versions i.e. English - SUS and Urdu - SUS. For the data
analysis, we used the Statistical tool SPSS v. 21.
IV. RESULTS
A. Basic Statistics Analysis
The total score of the English version mean is 34.35, n =
170, SD = 12.24 and the translated Urdu version mean is 35.82,
n = 170, SD = 11.79. The basic score of the translated version
is greater that indicates positive responses are given more in
number whereas the original SUS also received positive
responses but lower in number. Results for both versions are
shown in Figure 6, 7 below:
Figure 6 Mean and S.D of the English SUS, where n=170
Figure 7 Mean and S.D of the translated Urdu SUS where n=170
B. Reliability Analysis
As shown in Figure 8 and 9 below the translated
version is given more reliable results as the value of
Cronbach’s alpha is .835 greater than the minimum
acceptable value 0.7. Moreover, translated value is also more
reliable as compared to original SUS. The high value
represents that people were more comfortable in giving
answers in their language.
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
ISSN 1947-5500

Figure 8 Reliability of Translated Urdu SUS
Figure 9 Reliability of Original SUS
C. Degree of Correlation
Figure 10 represents the inter-item correlation of English
SUS where various items show negative interdependence. That
is a sign of minimum relation between these items. Item 2 and
3 represents the weak negative relationship with .45 whereas
item 3 and 6 show the strongest negative correlation with 0.99.
Similarly, items 3, 8, and 6, 9 are having maximum negative
correlation.
Despite negative relations where participants show their
negative response we still have some positive item responses
for example items 3, 5, and 4, 10 shows the strongest positive
interdependence.
Figure 10 Inter - Item Correlation Matrix of English SUS, where
n=10
In Urdu SUS most of the items illustrate that there is
positive interdependence between them. For example item 1, 7
and 3, 6 gives the strongest positive relationship between them.
Similarly, items 10, 4, and 5, 9 also represent a positive
relation. Here in Figure 11 negative relations also exist that
indicate some of the people were not truly satisfied with those
items, for example, items 1,2 and 4,5 states the strong negative
dependency whereas 4,9 and 1, 10 illustrates the weak
dependency among them. Resultantly, the Urdu SUS version
has more reliability as compared to the English SUS.
Figure 11 Inter - Item Correlation Matrix of Translated Urdu
SUS, where n=10
V. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE WORK
In this study, the questionnaire is applied to a student portal
website. The participants were well-educated and only the
representatives of Punjab. A similar audience is used for the
English SUS questionnaire as well as the Urdu SUS. Therefore,
there is a need to check the reliability of this Urdu scale for the
other provinces of Pakistan. Results formulation can also be
done by using different audiences for both scales.
VI. CONCLUSION
This study aimed to translate the System Usability Scale
into Urdu language and its reliability comparison with the
original scale. The results of this translation scale provide
higher reliability value and efficiency. It also illustrates that
participant’s show a better understanding of the questions when
it is translated into their native language. This scale can be
further used by Pakistani researchers who want to conduct
research on Pakistani participants.
REFERENCES
[1] P jain, S.K Dubey, A Rana. "Analysis and Performance Evaluation of
Software System Usability." international journal of computer
applications (2012).
[2] Mack, Zoë, and Sarah Sharples. "The importance of usability in product
choice: A mobile phone case study." Ergonomics 52, no. 12 (2009):
1514-1528.
[3] Blažica, Bojan, and James R. Lewis. "A Slovene translation of the
system usability scale: The SUS-SI." International Journal of Human-
Computer Interaction 31, no. 2 (2015): 112-117.
[4] Georgsson, Mattias, and Nancy Staggers. "Quantifying usability: an
evaluation of a diabetes mHealth system on effectiveness, efficiency,
and satisfaction metrics with associated user characteristics." Journal of
the American Medical Informatics Association 23, no. 1 (2016): 5-11.
[5] AlGhannam, Bareeq A., Sana A. Albustan, Abeer A. Al-Hassan, and
Lamees A. Albustan. "Towards a standard arabic system usability scale:
Psychometric evaluation using communication disorder app."
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 34, no. 9 (2018):
799-804.
[6] Tzafilkou, Katerina, and Nicolaos Protogeros. "Diagnosing user
perception and acceptance using eye tracking in web-based end-user
development." Computers in Human Behavior 72 (2017): 23-37
[7] Lewis, James R. "The system usability scale: past, present, and future."
577-590.
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
ISSN 1947-5500

[8] García-Peñalvo, Francisco J., Alicia García-Holgado, Andrea Vázquez-
Ingelmo, and Antonio M. Seoane-Pardo. "Usability test of WYRED
Platform." In International Conference on Learning and Collaboration
Technologies, pp. 73-84. Springer, Cham, 2018.
[9] Xue, Hui, Puneet Sharma, and Fridolin Wild. "User satisfaction in
augmented reality-based training using microsoft HoloLens." Computers
8, no. 1 (2019): 9.
[10] Drew, Mandy R., Brooke Falcone, and Wendy L. Baccus. "What does
the system usability scale (SUS) measure?." In International Conference
of Design, User Experience, and Usability, pp. 356-366. Springer,
Cham, 2018.
[11] Assila, Ahlem, and Houcine Ezzedine. "Standardized usability
questionnaires: Features and quality focus." Electronic Journal of
Computer Science and Information Technology: eJCIST 6, no. 1 (2016).
[12] Blažica, Bojan, and James R. Lewis. "A Slovene translation of the
system usability scale: The SUS-SI." International Journal of Human-
[13] Tullis, Thomas S., and Jacqueline N. Stetson. "A comparison of
questionnaires for assessing website usability." In Usability professional
association conference, vol. 1. 2004..
[14] Flavián, Carlos, Miguel Guinalíu, and Raquel Gurrea. "The role played
by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website
loyalty." Information & management 43, no. 1 (2006): 1-14.
[15] Orfanou, Konstantina, Nikolaos Tselios, and Christos Katsanos.
"Perceived usability evaluation of learning management systems:
Empirical evaluation of the System Usability Scale." The International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 16, no. 2 (2015):
227-246.
[16] Kortum, Philip, and Mary Sorber. "Measuring the usability of mobile
applications for phones and tablets." International Journal of Human-
[17] Kortum, Philip T., and Aaron Bangor. "Usability ratings for everyday
products measured with the System Usability Scale." International
Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29, no. 2 (2013): 67-76.
[18] Sauro, J. "Does prior experience affect perceptions of usability."
Retrieved December 20 (2011): I1.
[19] Silk, Jennifer S., Gede Pramana, Stefanie L. Sequeira, Oliver Lindhiem,
Philip C. Kendall, Dana Rosen, and Bambang Parmanto. "Using a
smartphone app and clinician portal to enhance brief cognitive
behavioral therapy for childhood anxiety disorders." Behavior Therapy
51, no. 1 (2020): 69-84.
[20] Jain, Piyush, Sanjay Kumar Dubey, and Ajay Rana. "Analysis and
performance evaluation of software system usability." International
Journal of Computer Applications 975 (2012): 8887.
[21] Flege, J. "A non-critical period for second-language learning." A sound
approach to language matters: In honor of Ocke-Schwen Bohn, Aarhus
University. Open access e-book at Aurhus University Library (2019).
[22] Hvidt, Julie Christine S., Lone Fisker Christensen, Christian Sibbersen,
Stig Helweg-Jørgensen, Jens Peter Hansen, and Mia Beck Lichtenstein.
"Translation and Validation of the System Usability Scale in a Danish
Mental Health Setting Using Digital Technologies in Treatment
Interventions." International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
36, no. 8 (2020): 709-716.
[23] Lewis, James R. "The system usability scale: past, present, and future."
577-590.
[24] AlGhannam, Bareeq A., Sana A. Albustan, Abeer A. Al-Hassan, and
Lamees A. Albustan. "Towards a standard arabic system usability scale:
Psychometric evaluation using communication disorder app."
799-804.
[25] Martins, Ana Isabel, Ana Filipa Rosa, Alexandra Queirós, Anabela
Silva, and Nelson Pacheco Rocha. "European portuguese validation of
the system usability scale (SUS)." Procedia Computer Science 67
(2015): 293-300.
[26] Al-Tahat, Khalid S. "An Arabic Adaptation of the Usability Metric for
User Experience (UMUX)." International Journal of Human–Computer
Interaction (2020): 1-6.
[27] Demirkol, Denizhan, and Cagla Seneler. "Evaluation of Student
Information System (SIS) In Terms of User Emotion, Performance and
Perceived Usability: A TurkishUniversity Case (An Empirical
Study)." Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019): 1033-1051.
[28] Sharfina, Zahra, and Harry Budi Santoso. "An Indonesian adaptation of
the system usability scale (SUS)." In 2016 International Conference on
Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems (ICACSIS), pp.
145-148. IEEE, 2016.
[29] Marzuki, Muhamad Fadhil Mohamad, Nor Azwany Yaacob, and Najib
Majdi Yaacob. "Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of
the Malay version of the system usability scale questionnaire for the
assessment of mobile apps." JMIR human factors 5, no. 2 (2018):
e10308.
[30] Kulatunga, G. G. A. K., P. E. K. B. Ranatunga, J. J. Hariyaram, and K.
Kasturiaratchi. "System Usability Scale (SUS) on local language: A Sri
Lankan case study." Sri Lanka Journal of Bio-Medical Informatics 10,
no. 3 (2019).
[31] Kortum, Philip T., and Aaron Bangor. "Usability ratings for everyday
products measured with the System Usability Scale." International
Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29, no. 2 (2013): 67-76.
Vol. 18, No. 6, June 2020
ISSN 1947-5500

IJCSIS
ISSN (online): 1947-5500
Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to submit and publish
original scientific results.
CALL FOR PAPERS
International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS)
January-December 2020 Issues
The topics suggested by this issue can be discussed in term of concepts, surveys, state of the art, research,
standards, implementations, running experiments, applications, and industrial case studies. Authors are invited
to submit complete unpublished papers, which are not under review in any other conference or journal in the
following, but not limited to, topic areas.
See authors guide for manuscript preparation and submission guidelines.
Indexed by Google Scholar, DBLP, CiteSeerX, Directory for Open Access Journal (DOAJ), Bielefeld
Academic Search Engine (BASE), SCIRUS, Scopus Database, Cornell University Library, ScientificCommons,
ProQuest, EBSCO and more.
Deadline: see web site
Notification: see web site
Revision: see web site
Publication: see web site
For more topics, please see web site https://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
For more information, please visit the journal website (https://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/)

Context-aware systems
Networking technologies
Security in network, systems, and applications
Evolutionary computation
Industrial systems
Evolutionary computation
Autonomic and autonomous systems
Bio-technologies
Knowledge data systems
Mobile and distance education
Intelligent techniques, logics and systems
Knowledge processing
Information technologies
Internet and web technologies, IoT
Digital information processing
Cognitive science and knowledge
Agent-based systems
Mobility and multimedia systems
Systems performance
Networking and telecommunications
Software development and deployment
Knowledge virtualization
Systems and networks on the chip
Knowledge for global defense
Information Systems [IS]
IPv6 Today - Technology and deployment
Modeling
Software Engineering
Optimization
Complexity
Natural Language Processing
Speech Synthesis
Data Mining

Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the Urdu Language

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the Urdu Language

Semelhante a Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the Urdu Language (20)

Último

Último (20)

Development of System Usability Scale (SUS) for the Urdu Language