8

Chapter 2

Literature Review

Chapter Objective

This chapter presents literature review in the field of web quality specifically serving

the purpose of factors identification. The literature analysis of research papers is

done with a view to represent literature in a condensed and more informative

manner.

2.1 Introduction

With the advancement in web technologies and its embracement by people, website

has made a significant transition from simple and static websites to dynamic, multi-

media rich websites, capable of interacting with visitors in a sophisticated way. Web

development is an ever-changing phenomenon, highly sensitive to all the expectations

and requirements of a modern web user.

Web development need to harmonize the purpose of the website as well as its

structure and interface with the expectations of the users. User–centered design is the

solution to meet the expectations of the target web users. User–centered design must

consider visibility, satisfaction, legibility, and language while planning the design of

website. For the purpose, web developers should consider target users profile, e.g.

their age, location, gender, and their education level. Defining the audience of the

website, which will be created, requires fulfilling the significant research in order to

take the road of success. The notion of web design and development is too broad and

versatile; hence, it is not an easy task to define some common features or trends

favored by both web developers and users.

Managing web quality from the perspective of web developer requires understanding

of the web server where site will be hosted, script language to be used at server and

client end, browser compatibility issues at client end, web design and programming.

Web quality from the perspective of web user is more tilted towards its usability,

satisfaction and legibility. The content quality is again a major issue which prompts

user to seek information from reputed websites.

9

2.2 Current Trend of Web Development

The development of web has been exponential. Growth of web users has been

tremendous and instrumental in development of a totally new web industry. Figure 2.1

depicts the growth of web users.

Figure 2.1: Growth of World Wide Web users (source: www.internetworldstats.com)

The growth in domain name registrations and website development has been

multifold in last few years. One of the reasons of this growth is the availability of web

development tools and platforms free of charge to aid in development. One of the

most common example is the LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) stack, which is

10

usually distributed free of charge. Another contributing factor towards growth of

websites has been the rise of easy to use WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You

Get) web development software, most prominently Adobe Dreamweaver, or

Microsoft Expression Studio. Within no time, virtually anyone can develop a website

using such software even without any knowledge of HTML (Hyper Text Markup

Language).

Web is no longer about simple information provider in the form of text and images

only. Streaming audio and video content is common today. Media contents are

commonly used in Media blocks on websites for a variety of purposes. They make

websites look more vibrant, natural and functional. Flash is widely used for animated

graphic content of an absolutely different nature – supported with dynamic content,

enriched with visual and sound effects. The only problem is its unfriendliness with

search engines.

The advancement in computer technology has resulted in larger computer displays

with higher resolution. Website layouts have accordingly incresead its width and

height to accomodate larger displays. The layout has become simpler in order to

provide more comfort for reading and navigating the site. Centered orientation is

preferred over the previously popular left-site orientation of web pages.

Web development has moved to a new phase of internet communication. The most

popular trend of communication on the internet seems to be social networking sites.

Facebook and Twitter are two of the most popular social networking sites used to

connect with people.

Web Content Management Systems are also widely popular to manage vast range of

contents. Many of them are freely available like Joomla and Wordpress, with

flexibility of moulding the site as per type of content.

The next generation of web development tools uses the strong growth in LAMP, Java

Platform and Microsoft .NET technologies to provide the web as a way to run

applications online. Web developers now help to deliver applications as web services

which were traditionally only available as applications on a desk based computer.

As the development of web advanced to a new level, the concept of web quality also

changed to an extent with certain new factors emerging as its defining criteria. To

assimilate the web quality factors reflecting the contemporary advancement in web

development, literature review was done.

11

2.3 Literature Review of Web Quality Factors

Several approaches towards website evaluation has been enumerated in last decade,

for instance, Ivory et al. (2000), Aladwani and Palvia (2002), Olsina and Rossi

(2002), Moraga et al. (2004), Calero et al. (2005), Seffah et al. (2006), Abramowicz et

al. (2008) and Olsina et al. (2009), etc.

Ivory et al. (2000) presents a methodology for evaluating information-centric

websites. Five stages have been proposed in the methodology:

a) Identifying an exhaustive set of quantitative interface measures such as the

amount of text on a page, colour usage, consistency, etc.

b) Computing measures for a large sample of rated interfaces

c) Deriving statistical models from the measures and ratings

d) Using the models to predict ratings for new interfaces

e) Validating model prediction.

Aladwani and Palvia (2002) proposed 25-item instrument that captures key

characteristics of website quality from the users’ perspective. The instrument was

designed to measure four dimensions of web quality: specific content, content quality,

appearance and technical adequacy.

Olsina and Rossi (2002) proposed the web quality evaluation method (WebQEM) to

define an evaluation process in four technical phases:

a) Quality requirements definition and specification [specifying characteristics and

attributes based on the ISO/IEC 9126-1 (2001) such as usability, functionality,

reliability, and effectiveness and taking into account web audience’s needs]

b) Elementary evaluation (applying metrics to quantify attributes)

c) Global evaluation (selecting aggregation criteria and a scoring model)

d) Conclusion (giving recommendations).

Nevertheless, evaluations take place mainly when the application is completed.

Kahn et al. (2002) developed a model as the Product and Service Performance model

for Information Quality (PSP/IQ). In this model a quadrant was formed wherein

column headings represented two views of quality, viz. 'conforming to specifications',

and 'meeting or exceeding consumer expectations' while rows headings represented

'product quality' and 'service quality'. The essential dimensions of IQ for delivering

high quality information were identified as accessibility, appropriate amount of

information, believability, completeness, concise representation, consistent

12

representation, ease of manipulation, free of error, interpretability, objectivity,

relevancy, reputation, security, timeliness, understandability and value added. These

dimensions were mapped into the PSP/IQ quadrants according to whether they can be

achieved by conformance to specifications or by considering the changing

expectations of consumers performing organizational tasks. A questionnaire was

prepared and data collected through survey and mean value was calculated for all four

quadrants of the model. This model considered only sixteen dimensions and their

impact on performance related to information quality, the interdependencies not being

taken into account.

Lee et al. (2002) developed a methodology called AIM quality (AIMQ) to form a

basis for Information Quality (IQ) assessment and benchmarking. The methodology

encompasses a model of IQ, a questionnaire to measure IQ, and analysis techniques

for interpreting the IQ measures. PSP/IQ model formed basis for further development

of the AIMQ methodology and hence was an improvement upon the PSP/IQ model.

Data was collected through survey and was analysed using SPSS software for

windows. The AIMQ methodology focussed on fifteen dimensions only.

Barnes and Vidgen (2002) used webqual (a method for assessing the quality of

Websites) and further developed it for quantitative analysis and the production of e-

commerce metrics such as the WebQual Index. WebQual Index was then further used

for assessing an organization's e-commerce capability. Three Internet bookstores were

evaluated on the basis of WebQual Index - Amazon, BOL, and the Internet Bookstore.

This paper dealt with only one of the main factors i.e. quality attributes and that also

on a specific domain of e-commerce.

Moraga et al. (2004) presented a Portal Quality Model towards portlet evaluation.

Portal Quality Model was based on the SERVQUAL model proposed by

(Parasuraman et al. 1998). A new dimension Data Quality (DQ) defined as "Quality

of the data contained in the portal" was added along with Tangible, Reliability,

Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy dimension.

Calero et al. (2005) presented the Web Quality Model (WQM), which was intended to

evaluate a web application according to three dimensions: Web Features (content,

presentation, and navigation); Quality Characteristics based on the ISO/IEC 9126-1

(2001) (functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, portability, and

maintainability); and Lifecycle Processes (development, operation and maintenance)

including organizational processes such as project management and reuse programme

13

management. WQM has been used to classify, according to these three dimensions, a

total of 385 web metrics taken from the existing literature. An evaluation process can

be defined by selecting the most useful set of metrics to construct a ‘total web quality’

expression that could be used to quantify the quality of a given web application.

However, guidelines on how to define this process have not been provided.

Seffah et al. (2006) presented the Quality in Use Integrated Measurement (QUIM) as

a consolidated model for usability measurement in web applications. QUIM combines

existing models from ISO/IEC 9126-1 (2001), ISO/IEC 9241-11 (1998) and others. In

this approach, usability is decomposed into factors, and then into criteria wherein a

criterion can belong to different factors. Finally, these criteria are decomposed into

specific metrics that can quantify the criteria.

Abramowicz et al. (2008) presented SQuaRE-based web services quality model

consisting of three perspectives internal web service quality, external web service

quality and web service quality in use.

Olsina et al. (2009) extended ISO/IEC 9126-1 (2001) model by including content

quality as one of the major dimensions besides functionality, reliability, usability,

efficiency, maintainability and portability.

Chiou et al. (2010) presented a web strategic framework for website evaluation. The

framework was designed to be applied by a specific website in terms of its goals and

objectives through a five-stage evaluation process. As such the framework was

strategic oriented for specific website rather than an overall representative of general

website evaluation.

Alkhattabi et al. (2010) focussed on information quality (IQ) of e-learning websites

considering nineteen quality dimensions. This paper represents dimension related

specifically to e-learning web environment.

2.4 Web Quality Factors Defined

Based on literature review on web quality following list of web quality factors were

identified initially for further review. (In alphabetical order)

1 Accuracy – attributes of website that bear on the provision of right or agreed

results or effects.

2 Adaptability – attributes of website that bear on the opportunity for its

adaptation to different specified environments without applying other actions or

means than those provided for this purpose for the website in question.

14

3 Analysability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed for diagnosis

of deficiencies or causes of failures, or for identification of parts to be modified.

4 Animation Complexity – attribute of website operation that bears on the

variation and duration of animation thereby increasing its complexity.

5 Architecture – ‘Architecture’ implies the degree to which information in a

website is suitably structured so that users can easily access information they

seek.

6 Assurance – ‘Assurance’ means the extent to which staffs of a website are

knowledgeable about their operation and courteous in their responses and can

convey trust and confidence to users.

7 Attractivity – attributes of website that bear on the satisfaction of latent user

desires and preferences, through services, behaviour and presentation beyond

actual demand.

8 Audience oriented guided tour – attribute of website operation that bears on the

guided tour provided for easy navigability for the audience.

9 Availability – attributes of website that bear on the amount of time the product

is available to the user at the time it is needed.

10 Broken Links – attribute of website navigation that bears on the broken links

that leads nowhere.

11 Browser related Deficiencies – attribute of website presentation that bears on the

features that are present actually but can't be viewed or viewed differently due to

different browser than it was meant for.

12 Changeability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed for

modification, fault removal or for environmental change.

13 Clarity – attributes of website that bear on the clarity of making the user aware

of the functions it can perform.

14 Client scripts – attribute of website maintenance that bears on the use of script

codes that affects the front–end (client / browser relate working and

functionality of the website).

15 Code reusability – attribute of website maintenance that bears on the reusability

of script codes that affects the overall working and functionality of the website.

16 Coexistence – the capability of the website to coexist with other independent

website in a common environment sharing common resources.

15

17 Collaboration – Collaboration is the process of working jointly or in partnership

for extracting useful information from each other.

18 Colours – attribute of website presentation that bears on the proper use of

colours in web pages.

19 Communication – ‘Communication’ implies the degree to which a website

educates and informs users in a language they can understand.

20 Company Information – attribute of website features that bears on the general

information of the company.

21 Compatibility – is the degree to which a website can be accessible and usable in

various sorts of user environment such as Web browsers or operating systems.

22 Completeness – ‘Completeness’ means the degree to which a website offers a

broad range of information which is relevant to users’ needs.

23 Comprehensibility – ‘Comprehensibility’ implies the degree to which

information a website exhibits is sufficiently understandable even to users who

have little background knowledge.

24 Contact Information – attribute of website features that bears on the process of

contacting the company using suitable means.

25 Customer Feedback Service – attribute of website features that bears on the

feedback provided by customers related to company.

26 Customisability – attributes of website that enable contents and interface

customized according to the user’s particular characteristics or needs to reduce

the effort required for use and increase satisfaction.

27 Degradability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed to re-

establish the essential functionality after a breakdown.

28 Depth of Navigational Map – attribute of website navigation that bears on the

maximum number of clicks required to reach desired webpage.

29 Details of Product or Service – attribute of website features that bears on the

details of the company products or service.

30 Download time – attribute of website presentation that bears on the amount of

time taken to download a complete web page.

31 Emotion – ‘Emotion’ denotes the extent to which a website evokes emotional

reactions from users.

32 Empathy – ‘Empathy’ is the extent to which a website can provide caring and

individualized attention to customers’ concerns and requests.

16

33 Explicitness – attributes of website that bear on the website product with regard

to its status (progression bars, etc.).

34 Fault tolerance – attributes of website that bear on its ability to maintain a

specified level of performance in cases of website faults or of infringements of

its specified interface.

35 Global readability – attribute of website operation that bears on the easiness

with which the site could be understood globally

36 Global style uniformity – attribute of website presentation that bears on the

uniformity of style used on different pages of the website

37 Graphics Clarity – attribute of website presentation that bears on the clarity of

graphics representing an idea or concept.

38 Graphics Use – attribute of website presentation that bears on the use of

graphics within a web page.

39 Helpfulness – attributes of website that bear on the availability of instructions

for the user on how to interact with it.

40 Incentive – ‘Incentive’ is a benefit given by a website that encourages users to

visit it continuously and enhances users’ satisfaction and loyalty to the website.

41 Information building effort – attribute of website development effort that bears

on the process of providing information in a way deemed fit to be presentable

and understandable by the audience of the website.

42 Installability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed to install the

website in a specified environment.

43 Interlinking Effort – attribute of website development effort that bears on the

cross linking of internal related topics in the website.

44 Interoperability – attributes of website that bear on its ability to interact with

specified systems.

45 Intimacy – ‘Intimacy’ implies the degree to which make users feel a close

relationship with or affection to a website through interactive processes.

46 Learnability – attributes of website that bear on the users’ effort for learning its

application (for example, control, input, and output).

47 Link Title with explanatory help – attribute of website navigation that bears on

the links available with explanation about the link.

48 Links – attribute of website navigation that bears on the overall links available

to reach anywhere in web.

17

49 Manageability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed to

(re)establish its running status.

50 Maturity – attributes of website that bear on the frequency of failure by faults in

the website.

51 Media digitizing effort – attribute of website development effort that bears on

the process of channeling media to be presented in digital format in the website.

52 Media Format – attribute of website features that bears on the way information

is presented on the website.

53 Menus consistency – attribute of website navigation that bears on the

consistency of menus in different web pages.

54 Multi Language support – attribute of website features that bears on the Multi

Language support for better understanding of details provided on website, by

users who are more comfortable with foreign language.

55 Multimedia – attribute of website presentation that bears on the effective and

efficient use of mutimedia techniques, clarity and use of the graphics within

website.

56 Object Oriented Programming – attribute of website development that bears on

the Object Oriented Programming in the website.

57 Object Oriented Programming effort – attribute of website development effort

that bears on the Object Oriented Programming effort in the website.

58 Operability – attributes of website that bear on the users’ effort for operation and

operation control.

59 Page complexity – attribute of website operation that bears on the different types

of add–ons in the web page thereby increasing its complexity.

60 Page Length – attribute of website presentation that bears on the proper length

of the web page being viewed.

61 Playfulness– ‘Playfulness’ means the degree to which a website can amuse or

entertain users.

62 Privacy Rules – attribute of website features that bears on the Privacy Rules

towards the user information provided on the website.

63 Proximity – means the degree to which users can locate to reach a website either

through search engines or easily remembered URL.

64 Quick Access Pages – attribute of website operation that bears on the direct

links provided to quickly access the desired pages.

18

65 Recoverability – attributes of website that bear on the capability to re-establish

its level of performance and recover the data directly affected in case of a

failure, and on the time and effort needed for it.

66 Redundant Links – attribute of website navigation that bears on the links that no

more exist.

67 Replaceability – attributes of website that bears on the opportunity and effort of

using it in the place of specified other website or in the environment of that

website.

68 Resource Behaviour – attributes of website that bear on the amount of resources

used and the duration of such use in performing its function.

69 Responsiveness – ‘Responsiveness’ means the degree to which a website fulfills

users’ requests or questions promptly.

70 Reusability – attributes of website that bear on its potential for complete or

partial reuse in another website product.

71 Reusable Comments – attribute of website reusability that bears on the process

of using comments again in the website.

72 Reusable Media – attribute of website reusability that bears on the process of

using different media in its reuse in different pages in the website.

73 Reusable Program Codes – attribute of website reusability that bears on the

program codes written in such a way as to use it again and again in the website.

74 Reusable Web Pages – attribute of website reusability that bears on the process

of providing web pages in such a way as to help in its reuse in other related

pages in the website.

75 Screen Resolution Indicator – attribute of website presentation that bears on the

ability to show size of screen used for web page design.

76 Search Capability – ‘Search capability’ means whether a website facilitates

search function or engine and the degree to which search results are accurate and

relevant to users’ intention.

77 Security – attributes of website that bears on its ability to prevent unauthorized

access, whether accidental or deliberate, to programmes or data.

78 Server Scripts – attribute of website maintenance that bears on the use of script

codes that affects the back–end (server relate working and functionality of the

website).

19

79 Site Map – attribute of website navigation that bears on the sitemap used in

website showing all links available within the website.

80 Stability – attributes of website that bear on the risk of unexpected effect of

modifications.

81 Status – attributes of website development that bears on the importance and

position with respect to other websites.

82 Style Sheet used – attribute of website presentation that bears on the style

definition used externally or internally within the webpage.

83 Style Sheets reusability – attribute of website maintenance that bears on the

reusability of styles that affects the visual appeal of the website.

84 Suitability – attribute of website that bears on the presence and appropriateness

of a set of functions for specified tasks.

85 Suitable Information – attribute of website features that bears on the relevant,

updated and accurate information suitable for the purpose of the core audience

of website.

86 Support – ‘Support’ is the degree to which a website facilitates supportive

information or learning tools which can contribute to enhancing users’

understanding to the website.

87 Terms and Conditions – attribute of website features that bears on the Terms and

Conditions towards the use of the website.

88 Testability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed for validating

the (modified) website.

89 Text (Font Style, size, colour) – attribute of website presentation that bears on

the style, size and colour of text used.

90 Time Behaviour – attributes of website that bear on response and processing

times and on throughput rates in performing its function.

91 Timeliness – ‘Timeliness’ is the degree to which a website provides current and

up–to–date information.

92 Total Media Allocation – attribute of website development that bears on the

allocation of media (i.e. video or audio or animation or any other for the purpose

of advertisement etc.) on the web pages.

93 Total Page Allocation – attribute of website development that bears on the

allocation of number of web pages considered important for the type of website

being developed.

20

94 Traceability – attributes of website that bear on the effort needed to verify

correctness of data processing on required points.

95 Trustworthy – ‘Trustworthy’ means the degree to which information in a

website is accurate, credible, and verified.

96 Understandability – attributes of website that bear on the users’ effort for

recognising the logical concept and its applicability.

97 Uniqueness – attribute of website features that bears on the uniqueness of the

information presented on the website.

98 User Friendliness – attributes of website that bear on the users’ satisfaction.

99 Variability – Variability is the degree to which a website presents information in

various sorts of format.

100 Web–link Errors – attribute of website navigation that bears on the linking error

with other web page or website.

101 Web Page Control Structure – attribute of website development that bears on the

structural importance provided for control on web pages of the site.

102 Web Page Design – attribute of website presentation that bears on the look and

feel of the web page being viewed.

2.5 Classification of Web Quality Factors

The web quality factors identified above need to be classified based on number of

citations in order to understand their importance towards web quality model.

Table 2.1 List of papers identifying web quality factors

S.No. Attributes or Factors Reference Papers

1 Accuracy Liu and Arnett (2000), Zhang et al. (2001), Aladwani

& Palvia (2002), Albuquerque & Belchior (2002),

Niessink (2002), Ramler et al. (2002), Rieh (2002),

Mich et al. (2003), Ran (2003), Webb & Webb

(2004), Calero et al. (2005), Aladwani (2006), Barnes

& Vidgen (2006), Papaioannou et al. (2006), Caro et

al. (2008), Behkamal et al. (2009), Fink & Nyaga

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009), Chiou et al. (2010),

Alkhattabi et al. (2010)

2 Adaptability Niessink (2002), DeLone and McLean (2003), Calero

et al. (2005), Abramowicz et al. (2008), Behkamal et

21

al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

3 Analysability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al.

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

4 Animation

Complexity

Santos (2003), Calero et al. (2005), Grigoroudis et al.

(2008)

5 Architecture Dustin et al. (2002), Signore (2005), Grigoroudis et

al. (2008)

6 Assurance Liu and Arnett (2000), Madu and Madu (2002),

DeLone and McLean (2003), Webb and Webb

(2004), Oztekin et al. (2009)

7 Attractivity Niessink (2002), Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al.

(2005), Caro et al. (2008), Behkamal et al. (2009),

Olsina et al. (2009)

8 Audience Oriented

Guided Tour

Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

9 Availability Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Albuquerque & Belchior

(2002), Cox & Dale (2002), Menasce (2002),

Niessink (2002), O'Sullivan et al. (2002), Offutt

(2002), DeLone and McLean (2003), Patel et al.

(2003), Moraga et al. (2004), Bilgin & Singh (2004),

Kalepu et al. (2004), Yoon et al. (2004), Calero et al.

(2005), Kim et al. (2005), Parasuraman et al. (2005),

Vu et al. (2005), Yu & Lin (2005), Aladwani (2006),

Abramowicz et al. (2006), Caro et al. (2008),

Behkamal et al. (2009)

10 Broken Links Olsina & Rossi (2002), Santos (2003), Calero et al.

(2005)

11 Browser Related

Deficiencies

Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

12 Changeability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al.

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

13 Clarity Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Albuquerque & Belchior

(2002), Cox & Dale (2002), Niessink (2002), Calero

22

et al. (2005), Aladwani (2006), Barnes & Vidgen

(2006), Behkamal et al. (2009)

14 Client Scripts Power and Kaparthi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

15 Code Reusability Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

16 Coexistence Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et

al. (2009)

17 Collaboration Constantinides (2002), Shaoshao et al. (2006), Chu et

al. (2007), Janssen et al. (2008)

18 Colours Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Santos (2003), Calero et

al. (2005), Aladwani (2006)

19 Communication Constantinides (2002), Cox & Dale (2002), Gounaris

and Dimitriadis (2003), Santos (2003), Kim and Stoel

(2004), Shaoshao et al. (2006), Chu et al. (2007),

Behkamal et al. (2009), Oztekin et al. (2009)

20 Company Information Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al. (2005)

21 Compatibility Dustin et al. (2002), Offutt (2002), Moustakis et al.

(2006)

22 Completeness Zhang et al. (2001), Agarwal and Venkatesh (2002),

Ranganathan and Ganapathy (2002), DeLone and

McLean (2003), Gounaris and Dimitriadis (2003),

Kim and Stoel (2004), Moustakis et al. (2006),

Behkamal et al. (2009)

23 Comprehensibility Wagner and Deissenboeck (2007)

24 Contact Information Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Olsina & Rossi (2002),

Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al. (2005), Parasuraman

et al. (2005), Aladwani (2006)

25 Customer Feedback

Service

Liu and Arnett (2000), Agarwal and Venkatesh

(2002), Cox & Dale (2002), Olsina & Rossi (2002),

Calero et al (2005), Barnes & Vidgen (2006)

26 Customisability Madu and Madu (2002), Niessink (2002), Calero et

al. (2005), Behkamal et al. (2009)

27 Degradability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al.

(2009)

23

28 Depth of

Navigational Map

Calero et al (2005), Moustakis et al. (2006)

29 Details of Product or

Service

Liu and Arnett (2000), Cox & Dale (2002), Calero et

al. (2005), Aladwani (2006)

30 Download Time Palmer (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al. (2005)

31 Emotion Constantinides (2002)

32 Empathy Liu and Arnett (2000), Barnes and Vidgen (2001),

Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Madu and Madu (2002),

Palmer (2002), DeLone and McLean (2003), Webb

and Webb (2004), Lee and Kozar (2006), Lin (2007)

33 Explicitness Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

34 Fault Tolerance Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal

et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

35 Global Readability Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

36 Global Style

Uniformity

Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Albuquerque & Belchior

(2002), Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

37 Graphics Clarity Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Calero et al. (2005),

Aladwani (2006)

38 Graphics Use Bell and Tang (1998), Aladwani & Palvia (2002),

Dustin et al. (2002), Santos (2003), Calero et al.

(2005), Aladwani (2006), Moustakis et al. (2006)

39 Helpfulness Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Barnes &

Vidgen (2006)

40 Incentive Bhattacherjee (2001), Cox and Dale (2002), Santos

(2003)

41 Information Building

Effort

Palmer (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al.

(2005)

42 Installability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al.

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

43 Interlinking Effort Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

44 Interoperability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), OASIS

24

(2005), Papaioannou et al. (2006), Abramowicz et al.

(2008), Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

45 Intimacy Joines et al. (2003), Akçura and Srinivasan (2005),

Wijaya et al. (2009)

46 Learnability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal

et al. (2009), Fernandez et al. (2009), Olsina et al.

(2009)

47 Link Title with

explanatory help

Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

48 Links Liu and Arnett (2000), Aladwani & Palvia (2002),

Cox & Dale (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Signore

(2005), Aladwani (2006), Olsina & Rossi (2002),

Calero et al. (2005)

49 Manageability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

50 Maturity Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal

et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

51 Media Digitizing

Effort

Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

52 Media Format Agarwal and Venkatesh (2002), Calero et al. (2005),

Aladwani (2006), Arshad & Shah (2007)

53 Menus consistency Calero et al. (2005)

54 Multi Language

Support

Dustin et al. (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al.

(2005)

55 Multimedia Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Calero et al. (2005),

Signore (2005), Aladwani (2006), Moustakis et al.

(2006)

56 Object Oriented

Programming

Ceri et al. (2004), Ruhe et al. (2003), Calero et al.

(2005)

57 Object Oriented

Programming effort

Ruhe et al. (2003), Calero et al. (2005)

58 Operability Niessink (2002), Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al.

25

(2005), Behkamal et al. (2009), Fernandez et al.

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

59 Page Complexity Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

60 Page Length Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

61 Playfulness Liu and Arnett (2000), Ahn et al. (2007)

62 Privacy Rules Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Ranganathan and

Ganapathy (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al.

(2005), OASIS (2005), Parasuraman et al. (2005),

Funk & Nyaga (2009)

63 Proximity Barnes & Vidgen (2001), Kim et al. (2002)

64 Quick Access Pages Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

65 Recoverability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal

et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

66 Redundant Links Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

67 Replaceability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al.

(2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

68 Resource Behaviour Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Ramler et al. (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Calero et al.

(2005), Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

69 Responsiveness Liu and Arnett (2000), Madu and Madu (2002),

Palmer (2002), DeLone and McLean (2003),

Gounaris and Dimitriadis (2003), Webb and Webb

(2004), Parasuraman et al. (2005), Lee and Kozar

(2006), Lin (2007), Oztekin et al. (2009)

70 Reusability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah

(2007), Behkamal et al. (2009)

71 Reusable Comments Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

72 Reusable Media Aladwani & Palvia (2002), Calero et al. (2005),

Arshad & Shah (2007)

73 Reusable Program

Codes

Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

74 Reusable Web Pages Calero et al (2005)

26

75 Screen Resolution

Indicator

Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

76 Search Capability Liu and Arnett (2000), Aladwani & Palvia (2002),

Cox & Dale (2002), Olsina & Rossi (2002), Santos

(2003), Moraga et al. (2004), Calero et al. (2005),

Aladwani (2006), Barnes & Vidgen (2006),

Moustakis et al. (2006), Fink & Nyaga (2009)

77 Security Liu and Arnett (2000), Zhang et al. (2001), Aladwani

& Palvia (2002), Albuquerque & Belchior (2002),

Dustin et al. (2002), Madu and Madu (2002),

Menasce (2002), Niessink (2002), Ramler et al.

(2002), Ranganathan and Ganapathy (2002), Offutt

(2002), DeLone and McLean (2003), Gounaris and

Dimitriadis (2003), Mich et al. (2003), Patel et al.

(2003), Ran (2003), Santos (2003), Tian & Gramm

(2003), Bilgin & Singh (2004), Yoon et al. (2004),

Webb & Webb (2004), Calero et al. (2005), Kim et

al. (2005), OASIS (2005), Aladwani (2006), Barnes

& Vidgen (2006), Lee and Kozar (2006), Lin (2007),

Abramowicz et al. (2008), Caro et al. (2008),

Behkamal et al. (2009), Fernandez et al. (2009), Fink

& Nyaga (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

78 Server Scripts Power and Kaparthi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

79 Site Map Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005),

Moustakis et al. (2006)

80 Stability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Calero et al. (2005), Olsina & Rossi (2002),

Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

81 Status Calero et al. (2005)

82 Style Sheet used Calero et al. (2005), Signore (2005)

83 Style Sheets

Reusability

Calero et al. (2005)

84 Suitability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

27

Ramler et al. (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal

et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

85 Suitable Information Palmer (2002), Mich et al. (2003), Gounaris and

Dimitriadis (2003), Calero et al. (2005), Barnes &

Vidgen (2006), Olsina et al. (2009)

86 Support Caro et al. (2008)

87 Terms and Conditions Calero et al (2005)

88 Testability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Calero et al. (2005), Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et

al. (2009)

89 Text (Font Style,

size, colour)

Cox & Dale (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Signore

(2005)

90 Time Behaviour Zhang et al. (2001), Albuquerque & Belchior (2002),

Niessink (2002), Ramler et al. (2002), Mich et al.

(2003), Kim and Stoel (2004), Calero et al. (2005),

Lee and Kozar (2006), Moustakis et al. (2006),

Behkamal et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

91 Timeliness Zhang et al. (2001), Agarwal and Venkatesh (2002),

DeLone and McLean (2003), Moustakis et al. (2006),

Caro et al. (2008)

92 Total Media

Allocation

Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

93 Total Page Allocation Calero et al. (2005), Arshad & Shah (2007)

94 Traceability Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Caro et al.

(2008), Behkamal et al. (2009)

95 Trustworthy Madu and Madu (2002), Rieh (2002), Kim and Stoel

(2004), Lin (2007), Behkamal et al. (2009)

96 Understandability Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Niessink (2002),

Olsina & Rossi (2002), Ramler et al. (2002), DeLone

and McLean (2003), Mich et al. (2003), Kim and

Stoel (2004), Calero et al. (2005), Lee and Kozar

(2006), Caro et al. (2008), Behkamal et al. (2009),

Fernandez et al. (2009), Olsina et al. (2009)

28

97 Uniqueness Bell and Tang (1998), Aladwani & Palvia (2002),

Calero et al. (2005), Moustakis et al. (2006)

98 User Friendliness Bell and Tang (1998), Albuquerque & Belchior

(2002), Niessink (2002), Calero et al. (2005), Barnes

& Vidgen (2006)

99 Variability Rutledge (2001), Ranganathan and Ganapathy

(2002), Chang and Kim (2007), Koning et al. (2009)

100 Web–link Errors Olsina & Rossi (2002), Calero et al. (2005)

101 Web Page Control

Structure

Albuquerque & Belchior (2002), Santos (2003),

Calero et al. (2005)

102 Web Page Design Ivory et al. (2001), Calero et al. (2005), Arshad and

Shah (2007)

2.6 Concluding Remarks

The chapter has reviewed the literature pertaining to web quality with a view to study

the current state of research. The available literature on web quality has covered

various domains like e-commerce, e-learning, e-governance etc. Most of the research

papers have mentioned domain specific quality factors. A need was felt to assimilate

web quality factors representing contemporary advancement in web technologies.

Based on literature review 102 representative factors are identified for further

analysis. Since the identified factors were considered sufficient to represent current

scenario of quality of websites, a need is felt for modelling the web quality system.

The web quality system need to be developed to consider the combined impact of

constituent subsystems and integrating them for applying a systems approach towards

quantification of web quality.