User Experience Questionnaire
This is the most up to date version of this scale.
Construct Summary
The authors define user experience as:
“feelings, impressions, and attitudes that arise when experiencing the product under investigation” (p. 64)
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.
Reviewed by Experts ✓
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.
PDF of scale as well as instructions for administration and scoring are not readily available. Check the paper for more details or email hriscaledatabase@gmail.com submit this information if you are the author of this scale.
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-exiting
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