This is the most up to date version of this scale.

Downloads

PAPER
Laugwitz, B., Held, T., & Schrepp, M. (2008). Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire. In HCI and Usability for Education and Work: 4th Symposium of the Workgroup Human-Computer Interaction and Usability Engineering of the Austrian Computer Society, USAB 2008, Graz, Austria, November 20-21, 2008. Proceedings 4 (pp. 63-76). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Construct Summary

The authors define user experience as:

“feelings, impressions, and attitudes that arise when experiencing the product under investigation” (p. 64)

Final Scale Items (26 total):

Attractiveness: annoying/enjoyable, unlikable/pleasing, good/bad, attractive/unattractive, friendly/unfriendly, unpleasant/pleasant

Perspicuity: not understandable/understandable, easy to learn/difficult to learn, complicated/easy, clear/confusing

Stimulation: valuable/inferior, boring/exciting, not interesting/interesting, motivating/demotivating

Efficiency: fast/slow, inefficient/efficient, impractical/practical, organized/cluttered

Novelty: inventive/conventional, creative/dull, usual/leading edge, conservative/innovative

Dependability: obstructive/supportive, unpredictable/predictable, secure/not secure, meets expectations/does not meet expectations

Rating = 85%

Check? Guideline Item
✓ Is the construct defined?
✓ Does the final version of the items capture the construct as it has been defined by the authors?
✓ Is the item generation process discussed (e.g., literature review, Delphi method, crowd-sourcing)?
✖ Person to items 10:1 for the initial set of items?
✓ Did they perform an EFA, PCA, Rasch, or similar test to determine the item to factor relationship?
✓ Did they describe how they determined number of factors?
✖ Did they report the full initial set of items?
✓ Did they provide loadings (EFA) or item fits (Rasch) of all items?
✓ Is there a description of the item removal process (e.g., using infit/outfit, factor loading minimum value, or cross-loading values)?
✓ Did they list the final items included in the scale?
✓ Did they include a factor structure test (e.g., second EFA, CFA, DIF, test for unidimensionality when using Rasch, or similar)?
✓ Was a measure of reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, McDonalds Omega_h or Omega_t, Tarkkonen’s Rho) reported?
✓ Was a test of validity (e.g., predictive, concurrent, convergent, discriminant) reported?

Comments Unclear which aspects of the development process reported in the paper pertain to the German or English version of the scale.


PDF of scale as well as instructions for administration and scoring can be accessed here

Reviewed by Experts ✓