Website quality evaluation: a model for developing comprehensive assessment instruments based on key quality factors

IF 1.7 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Journal of Documentation Pub Date : 2023-02-28 DOI:10.1108/jd-11-2022-0246
Alejandro Morales-Vargas, R. Pedraza-Jiménez, Lluís Codina
{"title":"Website quality evaluation: a model for developing comprehensive assessment instruments based on key quality factors","authors":"Alejandro Morales-Vargas, R. Pedraza-Jiménez, Lluís Codina","doi":"10.1108/jd-11-2022-0246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe field of website quality evaluation attracts the interest of a range of disciplines, each bringing its own particular perspective to bear. This study aims to identify the main characteristics – methods, techniques and tools – of the instruments of evaluation described in this literature, with a specific concern for the factors analysed, and based on these, a multipurpose model is proposed for the development of new comprehensive instruments.Design/methodology/approachFollowing a systematic bibliographic review, 305 publications on website quality are examined, the field's leading authors, their disciplines of origin and the sectors to which the websites being assessed belong are identified, and the methods they employ characterised.FindingsEvaluations of website quality tend to be conducted with one of three primary focuses: strategic, functional or experiential. The technique of expert analysis predominates over user studies and most of the instruments examined classify the characteristics to be evaluated – for example, usability and content – into factors that operate at different levels, albeit that there is little agreement on the names used in referring to them.Originality/valueBased on the factors detected in the 50 most cited works, a model is developed that classifies these factors into 13 dimensions and more than 120 general parameters. The resulting model provides a comprehensive evaluation framework and constitutes an initial step towards a shared conceptualization of the discipline of website quality.","PeriodicalId":47969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Documentation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-11-2022-0246","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

PurposeThe field of website quality evaluation attracts the interest of a range of disciplines, each bringing its own particular perspective to bear. This study aims to identify the main characteristics – methods, techniques and tools – of the instruments of evaluation described in this literature, with a specific concern for the factors analysed, and based on these, a multipurpose model is proposed for the development of new comprehensive instruments.Design/methodology/approachFollowing a systematic bibliographic review, 305 publications on website quality are examined, the field's leading authors, their disciplines of origin and the sectors to which the websites being assessed belong are identified, and the methods they employ characterised.FindingsEvaluations of website quality tend to be conducted with one of three primary focuses: strategic, functional or experiential. The technique of expert analysis predominates over user studies and most of the instruments examined classify the characteristics to be evaluated – for example, usability and content – into factors that operate at different levels, albeit that there is little agreement on the names used in referring to them.Originality/valueBased on the factors detected in the 50 most cited works, a model is developed that classifies these factors into 13 dimensions and more than 120 general parameters. The resulting model provides a comprehensive evaluation framework and constitutes an initial step towards a shared conceptualization of the discipline of website quality.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
网站质量评估:一种基于关键质量因素开发综合评估工具的模型
目的网站质量评估领域吸引了一系列学科的兴趣,每个学科都有自己独特的视角。本研究旨在确定本文献中描述的评估工具的主要特征——方法、技术和工具,并特别关注所分析的因素,在此基础上,提出了开发新的综合工具的多用途模型。设计/方法/方法在系统的文献综述之后,对305份关于网站质量的出版物进行了审查,确定了该领域的主要作者、他们的学科和被评估网站所属的部门,并对他们使用的方法进行了表征。发现对网站质量的评估往往以三个主要焦点之一进行:战略、功能或体验。专家分析技术在用户研究中占主导地位,大多数被检查的工具将待评估的特征(例如可用性和内容)分类为不同级别的因素,尽管在提及这些特征时使用的名称上几乎没有达成一致。原创性/价值基于在50部被引用最多的作品中检测到的因素,开发了一个模型,将这些因素分为13个维度和120多个通用参数。由此产生的模型提供了一个全面的评估框架,并为网站质量学科的共同概念化迈出了第一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Documentation
Journal of Documentation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
14.30%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The scope of the Journal of Documentation is broadly information sciences, encompassing all of the academic and professional disciplines which deal with recorded information. These include, but are certainly not limited to: ■Information science, librarianship and related disciplines ■Information and knowledge management ■Information and knowledge organisation ■Information seeking and retrieval, and human information behaviour ■Information and digital literacies
期刊最新文献
Information experiences of bonsai growers: a phenomenological study in serious leisure Information experiences of bonsai growers: a phenomenological study in serious leisure Constructing risk in trustworthy digital repositories Information seeking and communication model (ISCM): application and extension Evolving legitimacy of the public library in the 21st century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1