Development of a Usability Questionnaire for Automation Systems

  • Akihiro MaehigashiEmail author
  • Kazuhisa Miwa
  • Kazuaki Kojima
  • Hitoshi Terai
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9731)


In this study, we positioned automation systems as the third-generation artifacts and developed a generalized usability questionnaire with 18 questions for automation systems as daily used artifacts. This questionnaire could be used to evaluate various types of automation systems and is useful for the development and improvement of automation systems as artifacts used in our everyday life.


Automation system Usability test Questionnaire 


  1. 1.
    Parasuraman, R., Riley, V.: Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse. Abuse. Hum. Factors 39, 230–253 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rasumussen, J.: Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction: An Approach to Cognitive Engineering. Elsevier Science Publishing, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Norman, D.A.: Cognitive artifacts. In: Carroll, M. (ed.) Designing Interaction, pp. 17–38. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norman, D.A.: The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)-Part 11: Guidance on usability. ISO 9241-11:1998 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hornbæk, K.: Current practice in measuring usability: challenges to usability studies and research. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 64, 79–102 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    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. Taylor and Francois, London (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kirakowski, J., Corbett, M.: SUMI: the software usability measurement inventory. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 24, 210–212 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chin, J.P., Diehl, V.A., Norman, K.L.: Development of an instrument for measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 213–218. ACM Press, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee, J.D., See, K.A.: Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum. Factors 46, 50–80 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sarter, N.B., Mumaw, R.D., Wickens, C.D.: Pilots’ monitoring strategies and performance on automated flight decks: an empirical study combining behavioral and eye-tracking data. Hum. Factors 49, 347–357 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parasuraman, R., Manzey, D.H.: Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration. Hum. Factors 52, 381–410 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Miwa, K., Terai, H.: Theoretical investigation on disuse atrophy resulting from computer support for cognitive tasks. In: Harris, D. (ed.) EPCE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8532, pp. 244–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maehigashi, A., Miwa, K., Terai, H., Kojima, K., Morita, J.: Experimental investigation of calibration and resolution in human-automation system interaction. IEICE Trans. Fund. Electron. Commun. Comput. Sci. E96–A, 1625–1636 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akihiro Maehigashi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kazuhisa Miwa
    • 1
  • Kazuaki Kojima
    • 2
  • Hitoshi Terai
    • 3
  1. 1.Graduate School of Information ScienceNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Learning Technology LaboratoryTeikyo UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Faculty of Humanity-Oriented Science and EngineeringKindai UniversityOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations