Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What users really think about the usability of smartphone applications: diversity based empirical investigation

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years, smartphone devices are becoming progressively popular across a diverse range of users. However, user diversity creates challenges in smartphone application (app) development. The diversity of users is often ignored by designers and developers due to the absence of requirements. Owing to this, many smartphone users face usability issues. Despite that, no dedicated platform found that guide smartphone app designers and developers regarding human universality. The aim of this research is to explore the requirements of diverse users in smartphone apps and provide usability guidelines. The objectives of this research are achieved by following two scientific approaches. The human diversity requirements are located by conducting usability tests that investigated the requirements in the form of usability issues. The systematic literature review (SLR) process is followed in order to resolve the discovered usability issues. Both approaches resulted in a list of usability issues and guidelines. The usability tests returned 27 problems while the SLR came with a comprehensive set of universal usability guidelines that were grouped into eleven categories. The study concluded with some major outcomes. The results show evidence of critical usability problems that must be addressed during the design and development of smartphone apps. Moreover, the study also revealed that people with disabilities were three times severely affected by usability problems in such apps than people of different ages and their needs must be considered a top priority in the development of smartphone apps.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. App stores: number of apps in leading app stores 2018 | Statista. [Online]. Available: https://www.statista.com/statistics/276623/number-of-apps-available-in-leading-app-stores/. Accessed 12 Sep-2018

  2. Accessibility overview | Android Developers. [Online]. Available: https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/ui/accessibility/. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  3. Accessibility: Usability for all | Interaction Design Foundation. [Online]. Available: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/accessibility-usability-for-all. Accessed 12 Jun 2019

  4. Afzal W, Torkar R, Feldt R (2009) A systematic review of search-based testing for non-functional system properties. Inf Softw Technol 51(6):957–976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmad N, Rextin A, Kulsoom UE (2018) Perspectives on usability guidelines for smartphone applications : an empirical investigation and systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol 94(September 2017):130–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ayob NZB, Hussin ARC, Dahlan HM (2009) Three layers design guideline for mobile application. Proc. - 2009 Int. Conf. Inf. Manag. Eng. ICIME 2009, pp 427–431

  7. Baharuddin R, Singh D, Razali R (2013) Usability dimensions for mobile applications-a review. 5(6):2225–2231

  8. Ballantyne M, Jha A, Jacobsen A, Hawker JS, El-Glaly YN (2018) Study of accessibility guidelines of mobile applications. pp 305–315

  9. Bangor A, Staff T, Kortum P, Miller J, Staff T (2009) Determining what individual SUS scores mean : adding an adjective rating scale. 4(3):114–123

  10. Bangs D (2014) Freedom to Roam. Br Wildl 25(3):228

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bhuiyan M, Zaman A, Miraz MH (2017) Usability evaluation of a mobile application in extraordinary environment for extraordinary people. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04653., no. Ic5e, pp 96–103

  12. Billi M, Burzagli L, Catarci T, Santucci G, Bertini E (2010) LONG PAPER A unified methodology for the evaluation of accessibility and usability of mobile applications, pp 337–356

  13. Brooke J et al (1996) SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Eval Ind 189(194):4–7

    Google Scholar 

  14. Carmien S, Garzo A Elders using Smartphones – a set of research based heuristic guidelines for designers

  15. Carmien S, Manzanares AG, Sebastian DS (2014) Elders using smartphones – a set of research based. Uahci/Hcii:26–37

  16. Chen L, Babar MA, Zhang H (2010) Towards Evidence-Based Understanding of Electronic Data Sources. EASE’10 Proc. 14th Int. Conf. Eval. Assess. Softw. Eng., pp 135–138

  17. Cruz Zapata B, Hernández Niñirola A, Idri A, Fernández-Alemán JL, Toval A (2014) Mobile PHRs compliance with android and ios usability guidelines mobile systems. J Med Syst 38(8)

  18. Crystian M, Carvalho N, Dias FS, Grazielle A, Reis S, Freire AP Accessibility and usability problems encountered on websites and applications in mobile devices by blind and normal-vision users, pp 2022–2029.

  19. Darejeh A, Singh D (2013) A review on user interface design principles to increase software usability for users with less computer literacy. J Comput Sci 9(11):1443–1450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Díaz-Bossini JM, Moreno L (2013) Accessibility to mobile interfaces for older people. Procedia Comput Sci 27(Dsai 2013):57–66

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dybå T, Dingsøyr T (2008) Strength of evidence in systematic reviews in software engineering. Proc. Second ACM-IEEE Int. Symp. Empir. Softw. Eng. Meas. - ESEM ‘08, no. January, p 178

  22. Fogarassy-neszly CPP (2014) Municipal web sites accessibility and usability for blind users : preliminary results from a pilot study, pp 339–349

  23. Forrester Data: Mobile, Smartphone, And Tablet Forecast, 2017 To 2022 (Global). [Online]. Available: https://www.forrester.com/report/Forrester+Data+Mobile+Smartphone+And+Tablet+Forecast+2017+To+2022+Global/-/E-RES138971. Accessed 03 Sep 2018.

  24. Franklin A, Myneni S (2018) Engagement and design barriers of mhealth applications for older adults. pp 1–5

  25. Google Play Store: number of apps 2018 | Statistic. [Online]. Available: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266210/number-of-available-applications-in-the-google-play-store/. Accessed 17 Sep 2018

  26. Hanna L, Risden K, Alexander K (1997) Guidelines for usability testing with children. Interactions 4(5):9–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Harrison R, Flood D, Duce D (2013) Usability of mobile applications: literature review and rationale for a new usability model. J Interact Sci 1(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoehle H, Aljafari R, Venkatesh V (2016) Leveraging microsoft’s mobile usability guidelines: conceptualizing and developing scales for mobile application usability. Int J Hum Comput Stud 89(September 2013):35–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. How Many Test Users in a Usability Study? [Online]. Available: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-many-test-users/. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  30. Huang K (2009) Challenges in human-computer interaction design for mobile devices. vol I

  31. Huang H (2018) Blind users’ expectations of touch interfaces: factors affecting interface accessibility of touchscreen-based smartphones for people with moderate visual impairment. Univers Access Inf Soc 17(2):291–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hujainah F, Dahlan H, Al-haimi B (2013) Usability guidelines of mobile learning application. J Inf Syst Res Innov 5(December-Special Issue):70–77

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hussain A, Kutar M (2012) Apps vs devices : can the usability of mobile apps be decoupled from the device ? 9(3):11–16

  34. Idri A, Moumane K, Abran A (2013) On the Use of Software Quality Standard ISO/IEC9126 in Mobile Environments. 2013 20th Asia-Pacific Softw. Eng. Conf., no. December, pp 1–8

  35. Imtinan U, Chang V, Issa T (2013) Usability issues in mobile learning: students’ perceptions in Pakistani universities. QScience Proc 2013(3):19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Inostroza R, Rusu C (2014) Mapping usability heuristics and design principles for touchscreen-based mobile devices. (2241):1–4

  37. Inostroza R, Rusu C, Roncagliolo S, Jiménez C, Rusu V (2012) Usability heuristics for touchscreen-based Mobile devices

  38. Inostroza R, Rusu C, Roncagliolo S, Rusu V, Collazos CA (2016) Developing SMASH: a set of SMArtphone’s uSability heuristics. Comput Stand Interfaces 43:40–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Introduction - Accessibility - Human Interface Guidelines - Apple Developer. [Online]. Available: https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/accessibility/overview/introduction/. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  40. Introduction to Web Accessibility | Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) | W3C. [Online]. Available: https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  41. Iqbal MW, Ahmad N, Shahzad SK (2017) Usability evaluation of adaptive features in smartphones. Procedia Comput Sci 112:2185–2194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ismailova R (2017) Universities of the Kyrgyz Republic on the Web: accessibility and usability. Univers Access Inf Soc 16(4):1017–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. ISO 9241-11:2018(en), Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts. [Online]. Available: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en. Accessed 13 Sep 2018

  44. ISO 9241-20:2008(en), Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 20: Accessibility guidelines for information/communication technology (ICT) equipment and services. [Online]. Available: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-20:ed-1:v1:en. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  45. Kascak LR, Rébola CB, Sanford JA (1999) Integrating universal design ( UD ) principles and mobile design guidelines to improve design of mobile health applications for older adults

  46. Khan S, Tahir MN, Raza A (2013) Usability issues for Smartphone users with special needs – autism, pp 107–113

  47. Khan AA, Keung J, Niazi M, Hussain S, Ahmad A (2017) Systematic literature review and empirical investigation of barriers to process improvement in global software development: client–vendor perspective. Inf Softw Technol 87:180–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kitchenham B, Pearl Brereton O, Budgen D, Turner M, Bailey J, Linkman S (2009) Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol 51(1):7–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Kumar BA, Mohite P (2017) Usability of mobile learning applications: a systematic literature review. J Comput Educ 5(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kurniawan S, Zaphiris P (2005) Research-derived web design guidelines for older people, 129

  51. Lee Y, Lee J (2017) LONG PAPER a checklist for assessing blind users ’ usability of educational smartphone applications. Univers Access Inf Soc

  52. Lee Y, Lee J (2017) A checklist for assessing blind users’ usability of educational smartphone applications. Univers Access Inf Soc:1–18

  53. Leporini B, Isti CNR, Iit CNR, Buzziiitcnrit M (2012) Interacting with Mobile Devices via VoiceOver : Usability and Accessibility Issues, no. November

  54. Leuthold S, Bargas-Avila JA, Opwis K (2008) Beyond web content accessibility guidelines: design of enhanced text user interfaces for blind internet users. Int J Hum Comput Stud 66(4):257–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Lienhard KR, Legner C (2017) Principles in the design of mobile medical apps : guidance for those who care. pp 1066–1080

  56. Lobo D (2013) Web usability guidelines for smartphones: a synergic approach. Int J Inf Electron Eng 1(1):33–37

    Google Scholar 

  57. Looije R, te Brake GM, Neerincx MA (2008) Usability engineering for mobile maps. 07:532

  58. Masood M, Thigambaram M (2015) The usability of mobile applications for pre-schoolers. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci 197(February):1818–1826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Merrick R (2003) No wires attached : usability challenges in the connected. 42(4):639–651

  60. Mi N, Cavuoto LA, Benson K, Smith-Jackson T, Nussbaum MA (2014) A heuristic checklist for an accessible smartphone interface design. Univers Access Inf Soc 13(4):351–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Milne LR, Bennett CL, Ladner RE (2014) The accessibility of mobile health sensors for blind users. Proc CSUN 2014:166–175

    Google Scholar 

  62. Mkpojiogu EOC, Hashim NL, Adamu R (2016) Observed demographic differentials in user perceived satisfaction on the usability of mobile banking applications. Proc. Knowl. Manag. Int. Conf. 2016, no. August, pp 263–268

  63. Moreno L (2014) Accessibility to mobile interfaces for older people. Procedia - Procedia Comput Sci 27(no. Dsai 2013):57–66

  64. Morey SA, Stuck RE, Chong AW, Barg-Walkow LH, Mitzner TL, Rogers WA (2019) Mobile health apps: improving usability for older adult users. Ergon Des 27(4):4–13

    Google Scholar 

  65. Moumane K, Idri A, Abran A (2016) Usability evaluation of mobile applications using ISO 9241 and ISO 25062 standards

  66. Nayebi F, Desharnais JM, Abran A (2012) The state of the art of mobile application usability evaluation. 2012 25th IEEE Can. Conf. Electr. Comput. Eng. Vis. a Greener Futur. CCECE 2012, no. May, 2012

  67. Nielsen J (1995) Severity ratings for usability problems. Pap Essays 54:1–2

    Google Scholar 

  68. Nilsson EG (2009) Design patterns for user interface for mobile applications. Comput Des User Interfaces VI - Proc 7th Int Conf Comput Des User Interfaces, CADUI 2008 40(12):307–312

    Google Scholar 

  69. Nunes F, Alexandra P, Joa S (2016) User interface design guidelines for smartphone applications for people with Parkinson ’ s disease, pp 659–679

  70. Parente Da Costa R, Canedo ED, De Sousa RT, De Oliveira Albuquerque R, Garcia Villalba LJ (2019) Set of usability heuristics for quality assessment of mobile applications on smartphones. IEEE Access 7:116145–116161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Park K (2015) Toward accessible mobile application design : developing mobile application accessibility guidelines for people with visual impairment, pp 31–38

  72. Park W, Han SH, Kang S, Park YS, Chun J (2011) International journal of industrial ergonomics a factor combination approach to developing style guides for mobile phone user interface. Int J Ind Ergon 41(5):536–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Paz F, Paz FA, Villanueva D, Pow-Sang JA (2015) Heuristic Evaluation as a Complement to Usability Testing: A Case Study in WEB Domain. Proc. - 12th Int. Conf. Inf. Technol. New Gener. ITNG 2015, pp 546–551

  74. Persson H, Åhman H, Yngling AA, Gulliksen J (2015) Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Univers Access Inf Soc 14(4):505–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Petrie H, Kheir O (2007) The relationship between accessibility and usability of websites, pp 397–406

  76. Petrovčič A, Taipale S, Rogelj A, Dolničar V (2018) Design of mobile phones for older adults: an empirical analysis of design guidelines and checklists for feature phones and smartphones. Int J Hum Comput Interact 34(3):251–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Punchoojit L, Hongwarittorrn N (2017) Usability studies on mobile user interface design patterns: a systematic literature review. Adv Human-Comput Interact 2017

  78. Rahmati A, Tossell C, Shepard C (2012) Exploring iPhone usage: the influence of socioeconomic differences on smartphone adoption, usage and usability. MobileHCI:179–194

  79. Rauch M (2011) Mobile documentation: usability guidelines, and considerations for providing documentation on kindle, tablets, and smartphones. IEEE Int. Prof. Commun. Conf

  80. Reynoldson C et al (2014) Assessing the quality and usability of smartphone apps for pain self-management. Pain Med (United States) 15(6):898–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Rusu C, Roncagliolo S, Rusu V, Collazos C (2011) A methodology to establish usability heuristics. 4th Int. Conf. Adv. Comput. Interact., no. c, pp 59–62

  82. Salman HM, Wan Ahmad WF, Sulaiman S (2018) Usability evaluation of the smartphone user interface in supporting elderly users from experts’ perspective. IEEE Access 6:22578–22591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Schefer RP, Bezerra MS, Zaina LAM (2019) Supporting the development of social networking mobile apps for deaf users, pp 278–285

  84. Shitkova M, Holler J, Heide T, Nico C, Becker J (2015) Towards usability guidelines for mobile websites and applications. Wirtschaftsinformatik Proc:366–374

  85. Shneiderman B (2010) Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Pearson Education India

  86. Shneiderman B, Hochheiser H (2001) Universal Usability as a Stimulus to Advanced Interface Design (2001) Universal Usability as a Stimulus to Advanced Interface Design, no. June 2014

  87. Siebra C et al (2017) Toward Accessibility with Usability: Understanding the Requirements of Impaired Uses in the Mobile Context. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Ubiquitous Inf. Manag. Commun., pp 6:1--6:8

  88. Silva PA, Holden K, Jordan P (2015) Towards a list of heuristics to evaluate smartphone apps targeted at older adults: A study with apps that aim at promoting health and well-being. Proc. Annu. Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., vol. 2015-March, pp 3237–3246

  89. Sonderegger A, Schmutz S, Sauer J (2016) The influence of age in usability testing. Appl Ergon 52(September):291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Sugawara E, Kuroishi T, Hasegawa N, Takesue Y (1983) Determmation of serum albiimin by metachromasis of 5,5′-dibromo-o-cresol sulphonphtlialem; animal species-dependent metachromasis. Bunseki Kagaku 32(1):11–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Sun T et al (2018) In - hospital usability and feasibility evaluation of Panda , an app for the management of pain in children at home. no. April, pp 897–905

  92. Thitichaimongkhol K, Senivongse T (2016) Enhancing Usability Heuristics for Android Applications on Mobile Devices. Proc. World Congr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2016, vol I

  93. Trewin S (2006, May). Physical usability and the mobile web. In Proceedings of the 2006 international cross-disciplinary workshop on Web accessibility (W4A): Building the mobile web: rediscovering accessibility? (pp 109–112)

  94. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. [Online]. Available: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-to-usability/. Accessed 24 Sep 2018

  95. Vatavu RD (2017) Visual impairments and Mobile touchscreen interaction: state-of-the-art, causes of visual impairment, and design guidelines. Int J Hum Comput Interact 33(6):486–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Von Eye A, Mun EY (2014) Analyzing rater agreement: manifest variable methods. Psychology Press

  97. W. H. Organization et al (2001) International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  98. Waddell C et al (2003) Constructing accessible web sites. Apress

  99. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. [Online]. Available: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/. Accessed 14 Jun 2019

  100. Wirtz S, Jakobs E, Ziefle M (2009) Age-specific usability issues of software interfaces. Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Work With Comput. Syst., no. March 2017, pp 2–10

  101. Xu X, Akay A, Wei H, Wang SQ, Pingguan-Murphy B, Erlandsson BE, Li XJ, Lee WG, Hu J, Wang L, Xu F (2015) Advances in smartphone-based point-of-care diagnostics. Proc IEEE 103(2):236–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Zapata BC, Fernández-Alemán JL, Idri A, Toval A (2015) Empirical studies on usability of mHealth apps: a systematic literature review. J Med Syst 39(2):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Zhang D, Adipat B, Zhang D (2009) Challenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications vol 7318

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thanks the test participants and the organizations representing the disabled users. Also thanks to Mr. Danish Iqbal at COMSATS University Islamabad for highly valuable technical assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Computer Science and Technology, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China

    Sher Badshah & Arif Ali Khan

  2. Department of Computer Science, COMSATS University Islamabad, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan

    Sher Badshah, Shahid Hussain & Bilal Khan

Authors
  1. Sher Badshah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arif Ali Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shahid Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bilal Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arif Ali Khan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Ethics Review Committee (ERC) and all procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Consent form

Consent form for participation in the research

“Towards a Usable and Accessible Design: Designing Smartphone Applications for User Diversity”

Investigators: Sher Badshah, Bilal Khan

Sherbadshah46@gmail.com, bilal_nasar@yahoo.com

Department of Computer Science, COMSATS University,

Park Road, Tarlai Kalan, Islamabad, Pakistan,

1. Project Title: Towards a Usable and Accessible Design: Designing Smartphone Applications for User Diversity

2. Investigators: Sher Badshah, Bilal Khan

3. Purpose: The objective of this study is to comprehend people’s abilities of smartphone usages based on physiological, cognitive and motor ability tests and basic smartphone applications tasks. The research is targeting people from a different background (people with disabilities) and ages (children, young and elders) to be a fundamental study for the development of a usable and accessible user interface.

4. The process to be followed: We will brief the participants about the purpose of the study, explain the consent form to them, and ensure that they sign the consent form. We will then engage the participants in a 20-min experiment which will be stretched over 3 days.

5. Participant selection: Participants who meet the following requirements

  1. i)

    Children, young, elders, visually impaired, motor impaired, and hearing impaired

  2. ii)

    Have to experience with using smartphones

6. Risk and benefit: There will be minimal risk to the participants. Participants are free to withdraw before or at any time during the study without the need to give any explanation.

7. Consent details: We will brief the participants about the purpose of the study and explain the attached consent form to them, and ensure that they consent to participate and sign the consent form.

9. Compensation: Participants will receive a gift in the form of a dinner party of their time for the experiment.

10. Confidentiality: Information will be kept confidential by the investigators. Names or other identifying or identified information will not be kept with the data. The only other use will be to include excerpts or copies in the assignment submitted, but names and other identifying or identified information will not be submitted.

Consent Form

I hereby consent to participate in a research study conducted by Sher Badshah and Bilal Khan for research under the COMSATS University Islamabad (Department of Computer Science).

I agree to participate in this study the purpose of which is to investigate the smartphone applications usability and accessibility issues and challenges among diverse users.

I understand

  • the procedure explained to me by the investigators

  • that I am free to withdraw before or any time during the study without the need to give any explanation.

  • That all materials and results will be kept confidential, and, in particular, that my name and any identifying or identified information will not be associated with the data.

figure a

Appendix 2: System usability scale

figure b

Appendix 3: Selected primary studies

S.NO

Title

Study type

Year

Platform

Target users

S1

“Research-Derived Web Design Guidelines for Older People”

Conference/ASSETS

2007

Web

Elders

S2

“Beyond web content accessibility guidelines: Design of enhanced text user interfaces for blind internet users”

Journal/IJHCS

2008

Web

Blind

S3

“Design patterns for user interface for mobile applications”

Journal/advengsoft

2009

Smartphone

General

S4

“Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction”

Book/Pearson Education India

2010

General

General

S5

“Elders Using Smartphones a Set of Research Based Heuristic Guidelines for Designers”

Conference/UAHCI

2011

Smartphone

Elders

S6

“A Methodology to Establish Usability Heuristics”

Conference/ACHI

2011

General

General

S7

“Web Usability Guidelines For Smartphones: A Synergic Approach”

Journal/International journal of Information and Electronics Engineering

2011

Smartphones

General

S8

“Mobile Documentation: Usability Guidelines, and Considerations for Providing Documentation on kindle, Tablets, and Smartphones”

Conference/IPCC

2011

Kindle, Tablets, and Smartphones

General

S9

“Designing Mobile Apps for Visually Impaired and Blind Users”

Conference/ACHI

2012

Smartphone

Visually Impaired and Blind

S10

“Usability Heuristics for Touch-Screen Based Mobile Devices”

Conference/Ninth International Conference On Information Technology – New Generation

2012

Smartphone

General

S11

“Usability Guidelines of Mobile Learning Application”

Journal/JISRI

2013

Smartphone

Learning

S12

“Introducing Usability Heuristics for Mobile Map Applications”

Conference/26th International Cartographic Conference

2013

Smartphone

Map

S13

“A Review On User Interface Design Principles To Increase Software Usability For Users With Less Computer Literacy”

Journal/Journal of Computer Science

2013

General

Literacy Less

S14

“The Accessibility of Mobile Health Sensors for Blind Users”

Journal/Journal on Technology and Persons with Disabilities

2014

Smartphone

Blind

S15

“A heuristic checklist for an accessible smartphone interface design”

Journal/Universal Access In The Information Society

2014

Smartphone

General

S16

“Mobile PHRs Compliance with Android and iOS Usability Guidelines”

Journal/Journal of Medical Systems

2014

Smartphone

General

S17

“Accessibility to Mobile Interfaces for Older People”

Journal/Procedia Computer Science

2014

Smartphone

Elders

S18

“Toward Accessible Mobile Application Design: Developing Mobile Application Accessibility Guidelines for People with Visual Impairment”

Conference/Proceedings of HCI Korea

2015

Smartphone

Visual Impairment

S19

“The Usability of Mobile

Applications for Pre-Schoolers”

Journa/Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

2015

Smartphone

Children

S20

“Towards Usability Guidelines for Mobile Websites and Applications”

Conference/International Conference On Wirtschaftsinformatik

2015

Smartphone

General

S21

“A Study of Usability Principles and Interface Design for Mobile e-Books”

Journal/Ergonomics

2015

Smartphone

General

S22

“Enhancing Usability Heuristics for Android Applications on Mobile Devices”

Conference/WCECS

2016

Smartphone

General

S23

“Developing a SMASH: A set of Smartphone Usability Heuristics”

Journal/CSI

2016

Smartphone

General

S24

“Leveraging Microsoft’s mobile usability guidelines: Conceptualizing and Developing scales for mobile application usability”

Journal/IJHCS

2016

Smartphone

General

S25

“Principles in the Design of Mobile Medical Apps: Guidance for Those who Care”

Conference/International Conference On

Wirtschaftsinformatik

2017

Smartphone

Patients

S26

“Designing an Interface For a Mobile Application Based on Children’s Opinion”

Journal/iJIM

2017

Smartphone

Children

S27

“Perspectives on usability guidelines for smartphone applications: An empirical investigation and systematic literature review”

Journal/Information and Communication Technology

2018

Smartphone

General

S28

“A checklist for assessing blind user’s usability of educational smartphone applications”

Jounral/Unive Access Inf Soc

2017

Smartphone

Blind

S29

“Study of Accessibility Guidelines of Mobile Applications”

Conference/NUM 18

2018

Smartphone

Disabilities

S30

“Engagement and Design Barriers of mHealth Applications for Older Adults”

Conference/TechMindSociety

2018

Smartphone

Older Adults

S31

“Mapping Usability Heuristics and Design Principles for Touchscreen-based Mobile Devices”

Conference/EATIS

2014

Smartphone

General

S32

“Usability Evaluation Framework for Mobile Apps using Code Analysis”

Conference/EASE

2018

Smartphone

General

S33

“Supporting the Development of Social Networking Mobile Apps for Deaf Users: Guidelines Based on User Experience Issues”

Conference/DSAI

2018

Smartphone

Deaf

S34

“Toward Accessibility with Usability: Understanding the Requirements of Impaired Uses in Mobile Context”

Conference/IMCOM

2017

Smartphone

Impaired

S35

“Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed: gathering experts feedback while performing heuristic evaluation with a list of heuristics targeted at older adults”

Workshop/ACE

2014

Mobile

Older Adults

S36

“Three Layers Design Guideline for Mobile Applications”

Conference/ICIME

2009

Mobile

General

S37

“A Study on Design Principles and Requirements for Multimedia Application Development”

Conference/iSMSC

2015

Multimedia

Children

S38

“Usability Guidelines for Developing Mobile Application in the Construction Industry”

Conference/International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics

2015

Mobile

General

S39

“UX Design Guideline for Health Mobile Application to Improve Accessibility for the Visually Impaired”

Book/Mobile Applications

and Solutions for Social Inclusion

2016

Mobile

Visually Impaired

S40

“Towards a List of Heuristics to Evaluate Smartphone Apps Targeted at Older Adults: A Study with Apps that Aim at Promoting Health and Well-being”

Conference/Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

2015

Smartphone

Older Adults

S41

“Design of Mobile Phones for Older Adults: An Empirical Analysis of Design Guidelines and Checklists for Feature Phones and Smartphones”

Journal/International Journal of Human-Computer

Interaction

2017

Smartphone

Older Adults

S42

“A Systematic Literature Review of Research DerivedTouchscreen Design Guidelines for Older Adults”

Journal/IEEE Access

2019

Touchscreen devices

Older Adults

S43

“Mobile Health Apps: Improving Usability for Older Adult Users”

Journal/EID

2019

Mobile

Older Adults

S44

“Set of Usability Heuristics for Quality Assessment of Mobile Applications on Smartphones”

Journal/IEEE Access

2019

Smartphone

General

S45

“Usability Studies on Mobile User Interface Design Patterns: A Systematic Literature Review”

Journal/Advance in Human-Computer Interaction

2017

Mobile

General

S46

“Identifying Usability Issues in Instant Messaging Apps on iOS and Android Platforms”

Journal/Mobile Information Systems

2018

Smartphone

General

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Badshah, S., Khan, A.A., Hussain, S. et al. What users really think about the usability of smartphone applications: diversity based empirical investigation. Multimed Tools Appl 80, 9177–9207 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-10099-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-10099-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation