Factors affecting the perceived usability of the mobile web portal services: comparing simplicity with consistency | Information Technology and Management Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Factors affecting the perceived usability of the mobile web portal services: comparing simplicity with consistency

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Korean IT industry has noticed innovative changes emerging along with the increased popularity of smartphones. Increase of smartphone user has extended the smartphone business arena from simple and personal applications and content to professional software for the purpose of working in- and out of the office. In this regard, developing their services to be mobile-friendly would be important business strategies for Web business companies. The mobile data traffic in Korea had been 11.2 times increased from January 2010 to January 2011 and the average traffic per user in Korea is much higher than other countries. Usage of smartphones also has been steadily increased with the diffusion of smartphones. This may indicate that the dependency level on mobile portal service in Korea would be higher and more important than in other countries. This study analyzes the influences of UI simplicity and UI consistency on user perceptions of mobile portal services using PLS methodology. Simplicity shows a greater effect on usability and credibility than does consistency although consistency also shows a significant effect. In this regard, developing mobile Web services to be simple by following the selection and concentration strategy can be an effective strategic approach. Credibility shows a greater and direct effect on user satisfaction in this study than simplicity. But it does not mean that the perceived credibility should be treated simply as more important to user satisfaction than usability. Credibility of mobile Web services would be concreted more when the perceived usability would be developed with proper UI simplicity and consistency following the suggestion of Mann and Sahni. Also satisfaction significantly turns out to mediate the effect of credibility on loyalty. This study contributes as an earlier study on how and what the mobile Web service providers should design and provide their services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdul-Muhmin AG (2005) Instrumental and interpersonal determinants of relationship satisfaction and commitment in industrial markets. J Business Res 58(5):619–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alonso-Rios D, Vazquez-Garcia A, Mosqueira-Rey E, Moret-Bonillo V (2010) Usability: a critical analysis and a taxonomy. Int J Human Comput Interact 26(1):53–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1984) The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 49:155–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson JC, Narus JA (1990) A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. J Mark 54(1):42–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Anderson E, Sullivan M (1993) The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Manag Sci 12(2):125–143

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bagozzi R (1992) The self regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Soc Psychol Q 55:178–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ball D, Coelho PS, Machas A (2004) The role of communication and trust in explaining customer loyalty: an extension to the ECSI model. Eur J Mark 38(9/10):1271–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bevan N (2001) International standards for HCI and usability. Int J Human Comput Stud 55(4):533–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Blair-Early A, Zender M (2008) User interface design principles for interaction design. Des Issues 24(3):85–107

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bove LL, Johnson LW (2006) Customer loyalty to one service worker: should it be discouraged? Int J Res Mark 23:79–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Carstens D, Patterson P (2005) Usability testing of travel websites. J Usability Stud 1(1):47–61

    Google Scholar 

  12. Carmines E, Zeller R (1979) Reliability and validity assessment. Sage paper series on quantitative applications no. 07-017, Sage Publications Inc, Beverly Hills

  13. Casalo L, Flavian C, Guinaliu M (2008) The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process. Comput Human Behav 24:325–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chae M, Kim J (2004) Do size and structure matter to mobile users? An empirical study of the effects of screen size, information structure, and task complexity on user activities with standard web phones. Behav Inf Techol 23(3):165–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chaudhuri A, Holbrook MB (2001) The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. J Mark 65(2):81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen M, Zhang D, Zhou L (2005) Providing web services to mobile users: the architecture design of an m-service portal. Int J Mobile Commun 3(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In: Macoulides GA (ed) Modern methods for business research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 295–336

    Google Scholar 

  18. Clark BH, Montgomery DB (1998) Deterrence, reputations, and competitive cognition. Manag Sci 44(1):62–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cui Y, Roto V (2008) “How people use the web on mobile devices”, WWW 2008. Beijing, China

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dianne C, Milena H, Alex I (2006) Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce. Inf Manag 43:950–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ding L, Velicer WF, Harlow LL (1995) Effects of estimation methods, number of indicators per factor, and improper solution on structural equation modeling fit indices. Struct Equ Modeling 2:119–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fogg BJ, Tseng H (1999) The elements of computer credibility. CHI’99, Pittsburgh, pp 80–87

  23. Fogg BJ, Marshall J, Osipovich A, Varma C, Laraki O, Fang N, Paul J, Rangnekar A, Shon J, Swani P, Treinen M (2000) Elements that affect web credibility: early results from a self-report study. In: Proceedings of CHI ‘00 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 287–288

  24. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gabriel RD (1994) Lisp: good news bad news how to win Big. AI Expert 6:31–39

    Google Scholar 

  26. Garbarino E, Johnson MS (1999) The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. J Mark 63(2):70–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Golbeck J, Parsia B, Hendler J (2003) Trust networks on the semantic web. In: Proceedings of cooperative intelligent agents, pp 238–249

  28. Grudin J (1989) The case against user interface consistency. Commun ACM 32(10):1164–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gudergan SP, Ringle CM, Wende S, Will A (2007) Confirmatory tetrad analysis in PLS path modeling. J Business Res 61:1238–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gustafsson A, Johnson MD, Roos I (2005) The effect of customer satisfaction, relationship commitment dimensions and triggers on customer retention. J Mark 69:210–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hall RJ, Snell AF, Foust MS (1999) Item parceling strategies in SEM: investigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organ Res Methods 2(3):233–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Adv Int Mark 20:277–319

    Google Scholar 

  33. Herbig P, Milewicz J (1995) The relationship of reputation and credibility to brand success. J Consumer Mark 12(4):5–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ho SY, Kwon SH (2003) The attraction of personalized service for users in mobile commerce: an empirical study. ACM SIGecom Exch 3(4):10–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hovland CI, Janis IL, Kelley HH (1953) Communication and persuasion. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hulland J (1999) Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strateg Manag J 20(2):195–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jacoby JRW, Chestnut R (1978) Brand loyalty measurement and management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jarvis CB, Mackenzie SB, Podsakoff PM (2003) A Critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J Consumer Res 30:199–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jindal A, Crutchfield C, Goel S, Jain R, Kolluri R (2008) The mobile web is structurally different. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE global internet symposium

  40. Jo S (2005) The effect of online media credibility on trust relationships. J Website Promotion 1(2):57–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ketola P, Hjelmeroos HJ, Raiha K (2000) Coping with consistency under multiple design constraints: the case of the nokia 9000 WWW browser. Personal Technol 4:86–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. KISDI (2011) Policy recommendation for competitiveness enhancement of mobile eco-system. Korea Information Society Development Institute, Gwacheon

    Google Scholar 

  43. Koiso-Kanttila N (2003). Consumers on the web: identification of usage patterns. First Monday [Online], 8(4). Available at http://ojphi.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1042/963

  44. Koohang A (2004) A study of users’ perceptions toward e-learning courseware usability. Int J E Learn 3(2):10–17

    Google Scholar 

  45. Koohang A (2004) Expanding the concept of usability. Informing Sci J 7:129–141

    Google Scholar 

  46. Koohang A, Ondracek J (2005) Users’ views about the usability of digital libraries. Br J Educ Technol 36(3):407–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lee D, Moon J, Kim YJ (2007) The effects of simplicity and interactivity in blog services. Conference’07 of the Korea society of management information systems

  48. Lee D, Moon J, Kim YJ (2007) The effect of simplicity and perceived control on perceived ease of use. Americas conference on information systems 2007

  49. Lee KP, Lee JH (2011) Usability in korea – from GUI to user experience design. In: Douglas I, Liu Z (eds) Global usability, human-computer interaction series. Springer, London, pp 309–331

  50. Liao C, To P, Liu C, Kuo P, Chuang S (2011) Factors influencing the intended use of web portals. Online Inf Rev 35(2):237–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Maeda J (2004) Simplicity. BT Technol J 22(4):285–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Maeda J (2006) The laws of simplicity. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  53. Mann BJS, Sahni SK (2011) Inter-relationshiop of web site interactivity and customer outcomes: building trust in internet banking web site. Global Business Review 12(1):99–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Muylle S, Moenaert R, Despontin M (2004) The conceptualization and empirical validation of website user satisfaction. Inf Manag 41(5):543–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  56. Nielsen J (1994) Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. ACM CHI’94 conference, April 24–28, Boston, MA

  57. Nielsen J (2000) Designing web usability: the practice of simplicity. New Riders, Indianapolis

    Google Scholar 

  58. Nielsen J (2003) Usability 101. Available at http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html

  59. The Nielsen-KoreanClick (2011) Using behaviors of android smartphone users, 2011.08.12. Available at http://www.koreanclick.com/information/info_data_view.php?m=topic&sub_mode=topic&id=284

  60. Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  61. Obendorf H (2009) Minimalism: designing simplicity, human–computer interaction series. Springer, London

  62. Oliver RL (1999) Whence consumer loyalty. J Mark 63:33–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Ozok AA, Salvendy G (2000) Measuring consistency pf web page design and its effects on performance and satisfaction. Ergonomics 43:443–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Ozok AA, Salvendy G (2001) How consistent is your web design? Behav Inf Technol 20(6):433–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Podsakoff PM, Farh J (1989) Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance. Organ Behav Human Decis Process 44:45–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Roy M, Dewit O, Aubert BA (2001) The impact of interface quality on trust in web retailers. Cirano Scientific Series, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  67. SAP Design Guild (2004) Simplifying for usability. Available athttp://www.sapdesignguild.org/goodies/simplification/index.htm

  68. Selnes F, Gronhaug K (2000) Effects of supplier reliability and benevolence in business marketing. J Business Res 59(3):259–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sobel ME (1982) Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In: Leinhart S (ed) Sociological methodology. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 290–312

    Google Scholar 

  70. Shneiderman B, Plaisant C (2005) Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction, 4th edn. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  71. Schmidt-belz B (2003) Aspects of user trust in mobile guides. Workshop “HCI in mobile guides”, Udine (Italy), 8 September 2003

  72. Sweeney JC, Swait J (2008) The role of brand credibility on customer loyalty. J Retail Consumer Serv 15:179–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Telecoms Korea (2009) Korean smartphone market to explode. Available at http://www.telecomskorea.com/smartphone-7370.html

  74. Tenenhaus M, Vinzi VE, Chatelin Y, Lauro C (2005) PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal 48:159–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Tischler L (2005) The beauty of simplicity. Fast Company 100:53–60

    Google Scholar 

  76. Tseng H, Fogg BJ (1999) Credibility and computing technology. Commun ACM 42(5):39–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wathen CM, Burkell J (2002) Believe it or not: factors inuencing credibility on the web. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 53(2):134–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Williams LJ, Holahan PJ (1994) Parsimony-based fit indices for multiple-indicator models: do they work? Struct Equ Modeling 1:161–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Wilson B (2007) Modeling reflective higher-order constructs using three approaches with pls math modeling: a monte carlo comparison. Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy conference 2007

  80. Wright K (2000) Perceptions of On-line support providers: an examination of perceived homophily, source credibility, communication and social support within on-line support groups. Commun Q 48(1):44–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Yang Z, Peterson RT (2004) Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: the role of switching costs. Psychol Mark 21(10):799–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the MKE(The Ministry of Knowledge Economy), Korea, under the ITRC(Information Technology Research Center) support program supervised by the NIPA(National IT Industry Promotion Agency) (NIPA-2012-H0301-12-1004).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Corporate Strategy Research Center, POSCO Research Institute, POSRI Bldg., #514, Bongeunsa-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 135-878, Republic of Korea

    Jongtae Lee

  2. Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, 3330 Van Munching Hall, University of Maryland College Park, MD, 20742-181, USA

    Dongwon Lee

  3. Program in regional Information, Seoul National University, #599, Gwanangno, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-921, Republic of Korea

    Junghoon Moon

  4. Department of Management Science, KAIST, #5112, N22, 291, Daehakro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-701, Republic of Korea

    Myeong-Cheol Park

Authors
  1. Jongtae Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dongwon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Junghoon Moon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Myeong-Cheol Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Myeong-Cheol Park.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, J., Lee, D., Moon, J. et al. Factors affecting the perceived usability of the mobile web portal services: comparing simplicity with consistency. Inf Technol Manag 14, 43–57 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-012-0143-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-012-0143-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation