PET-USES: Privacy-Enhancing Technology – Users’ Self-Estimation Scale

  • Erik Wästlund
  • Peter Wolkerstorfer
  • Christina Köffel
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 320)

Abstract

This paper describes the “Privacy-Enhancing Technology Users’ Self-Estimation Scale (PET-USES)”, a questionnaire that enables users to evaluate PET user interfaces for their overall usability and to measure six different PET aspects. The PET-USES is intended to be used during usability testing and evaluation of PET user interfaces. The focus of the PET-USES is the subjective experience of the user rather than the intrinsic PET functionality of the application being tested. Although the test has been developed within the PrimeLife project to test the usability of PETs developed therein, the test is constructed in such a fashion that it should be applicable to a wide variety of PETs. The objective of this paper is to outline the creation and the background of the PET-USES questionnaire and invite the usability community not only to use the test, but also to contribute to the further development of the PET-USES.

Keywords

PET-USES HCI Usability PET 

References

  1. 1.
    Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., Koller, F.: AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In: Ziegler, J., Szwillus, G. (eds.) Mensch & Computer 2003, Interaktion in Bewegung, pp. 187–196 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooke, J.: SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, I.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor & Francis, London (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tullis, T.S., Stetson, J.N.: A Comparison of Questionnaires for Assessing Website Usability. In: Usability Professional Association Conference (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISO. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)-Part 11: guidance on usability-Part 11: guidance on usability (ISO 9241-11:1998) (1998) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Patrick, A.S., Kenny, S., Holmes, C., van Breukelen, M.: Human Computer Interaction. In: Handbook for Privacy and Privacy-Enhancing Technologies: College bescherming persoonsgegevens, pp. 249–290 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pettersson, J.S. (ed.): HCI Guidelines, PRIME Deliverable, D6.1.c (2005), https://www.prime-project.eu/prime_products/reports/arch/pub_del_D06.1.c_ec_wp06.1_V4_final.pdf
  7. 7.
    Hornbæk, K.: Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 64, 79–102 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frøkjær, E., Hertzum, M., Hornbæk, K.: Measuring Usability: Are Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Satisfaction Really Correlated? In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2000 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 1-6, pp. 345–352. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edmondson, D.: Likert Scales: A History. In: CHARM – the Conference on Historical Analysis and Research in Marketing, pp. 127–132 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Butler, P.V.: Linear Analogue Self-Assessment and Procrustean Measurement: A Critical Review of Visual Analogue Scaling in Pain Assessment. J. Clin. Psychol. Med. Settings 19, 111–129 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Göb, R., McCollin, C., Ramalhoto, M.: Ordinal Methodology in the Analysis of Likert Scales. Quality and Quantity 41, 601–626 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anastasi, A., Urbina, S.: Psychological Testing, 7th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Blarkom, G.W., Borking, J.J., Olk, J.G.E.: PET. In: van Blarkom, G.W., Borking, J.J., Olk, J.G.E. (eds.) Handbook of privacy and privacy-enhancing technologies (the case of intelligent software agents) (2003), http://www.andrewpatrick.ca/pisa/handbook/handbook.html
  14. 14.
    Harbird, R.: Privacy enhancing technologies. In: Information Commissioner’s Office, UK, Privacy by design. Wycliffe House, Cheshire (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Koorn, R., van Gils, H., ter Hart, J., Overbeek, P., Tellegen, R.: Privacy-enhancing technologies: White paper for decision makers. Ministry of Interior and Kingdom Relations, The Netherlands (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bergmann, M.: Generic Predefined Privacy Preferences for Online Applications. In: Fischer-Hübner, S., Duquenoy, P., Zuccato, A., Martucci, L. (eds.) The Future of Identity in the Information Society Boston, pp. 259–273. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erik Wästlund
    • 1
  • Peter Wolkerstorfer
    • 2
  • Christina Köffel
    • 2
  1. 1.Dep. of PsychologyKarlstad UniversitySweden
  2. 2.CURE – Center for Usability Research and EngineeringViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations