Construct and Survey of the Dimensions used to Assess the Quality of Commercial Websites: A Systematic Review / Construção e Levantamento das Dimensões Utilizadas para Avaliar a Qualidade de Sites Comerciais: Uma Revisão Sistemática
Resumo
Maintaining an attractive, easy-to-use website that stands out in the industry in which it operates is a premise for any business that intends to use the internet effectively. However, users to encounter many problems when interacting with websites, and this is because many organizations do not have a complete understanding of what a website really means to them. Although there is a lot of evidence in the form meta-analysis reviews related to website quality assessment, a systematic review of these meta-analyses is lacking in the literature. Our objective was to synthesize the existing literature to identify the main dimensions and analysis methods associated with website quality assessment. Following the recommendations PRISMA statement for systematic reviews, we reviewed relevant articles identified in the Web of Science and Scopus databases. A total of 38 original research articles related to website quality assessment were retrieved and selected for eligibility. The results present an overview of studies on website quality assessment, identifying the main criteria used for their assessment. Our review shows that there are more than a hundred dimensions used in studies to assess the quality of websites, however, these dimensions have similarities and therefore were grouped, providing a broad view of the most used dimensions.
Keywords: Websites quality. Websites evaluation, Electronic commerce, Electronic Business.
RESUMO
Manter um site atraente, fácil de usar e que se destaque no setor em que atua é uma premissa para qualquer empresa que pretenda utilizar a internet de forma eficaz. No entanto, os usuários encontram muitos problemas ao interagir com sites, e isso ocorre porque muitas organizações não têm um entendimento completo do que um site realmente significa para eles. Embora haja muitas evidências na forma de revisões de meta-análise relacionadas à avaliação da qualidade do site, uma revisão sistemática dessas meta-análises está faltando na literatura. Nosso objetivo foi sintetizar a literatura existente para identificar as principais dimensões e métodos de análise associados à avaliação da qualidade do website. Seguindo as recomendações da declaração PRISMA para revisões sistemáticas, revisamos artigos relevantes identificados nas bases de dados Web of Science e Scopus. Um total de 38 artigos de pesquisa originais relacionados à avaliação da qualidade do site foram recuperados e selecionados para elegibilidade. Os resultados apresentam um panorama dos estudos sobre avaliação da qualidade de websites, identificando os principais critérios utilizados para sua avaliação. Nossa revisão mostra que existem mais de uma centena de dimensões utilizadas em estudos para avaliar a qualidade de sites, porém, essas dimensões possuem semelhanças e por isso foram agrupadas, proporcionando uma visão ampla das dimensões mais utilizadas.
Palavras-chave: Qualidade de sites. Avaliação de Websites. Comércio Eletrônico. Negócios Eletrônicos.
Referências
Abdallah, S., & Jaleel, B. (2015). Website appeal: development of an assessment tool and evaluation framework of e-marketing. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 10(3), 45-62.
Akram, U., Hui, P., Khan, M. K., Tanveer, Y., Mehmood, K., & Ahmad, W. (2018). How website quality affects online impulse buying: Moderating effects of sales promotion and credit card use. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics.
Aladwani, A. M., & Palvia, P. C. (2002). Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality. Information & management, 39(6), 467-476.
Ali, F. (2016). Hotel website quality, perceived flow, customer satisfaction and purchase intention. Journal of hospitality and tourism technology.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2001). An evaluation of cyber-bookshops: the WebQual method. International journal of electronic commerce, 6(1), 11-30.
Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. T. (2002). An integrative approach to the assessment of e-commerce quality. J. Electron. Commer. Res., 3(3), 114-127.
Barriocanal, E. G., Sicilia Urbán, M. A., González, L., & Hilera, J. R. (2005). Dialogue-based design of web usability questionnaires using ontologies Computer-Aided Design of User Interfaces IV (pp. 133-146): Springer.
Chen, J. V., Rungruengsamrit, D., Rajkumar, T., & Yen, D. C. (2013). Success of electronic commerce Web sites: A comparative study in two countries. Information & management, 50(6), 344-355.
Chen, Q., & Wells, W. D. (1999). Attitude toward the site. Journal of advertising research, 39(5), 27-38.
Claridge, N. K., Jurek. (2021). WAMMI: Website Analysis and Measurement Inventory Questionnaire. [Online]. Available at: http://www.wammi.com/. Acessed in september 2021.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information systems research, 3(1), 60-95.
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of management information systems, 19(4), 9-30.
Ecer, F. (2014). A hybrid banking websites quality evaluation model using AHP and COPRAS-G: a Turkey case. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(4), 758-782.
Elling, S., Lentz, L., de Jong, M., & Van den Bergh, H. (2012). Measuring the quality of governmental websites in a controlled versus an online setting with the ‘Website Evaluation Questionnaire’. Government information quarterly, 29(3), 383-393.
Elling, S., Lentz, L., & Jong, M. d. (2007). Website evaluation questionnaire: development of a research-based tool for evaluating informational websites. Paper presented at the International conference on electronic government.
Fogli, D., & Guida, G. (2018). Evaluating quality in use of corporate web sites: An empirical investigation. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), 12(3), 1-35.
Gao, W., & Li, X. (2019). Building presence in an online shopping website: the role of website quality. Behaviour & information technology, 38(1), 28-41.
Giao, H., Vuong, B., & Quan, T. (2020). The influence of website quality on consumer’s e-loyalty through the mediating role of e-trust and e-satisfaction: An evidence from online shopping in Vietnam. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 8(2), 351-370.
Gounaris, S., & Dimitriadis, S. (2003). Assessing service quality on the Web: evidence from business‐to‐consumer portals. Journal of Services Marketing.
Green, D., & Pearson, J. M. (2006). Development of a web site usability instrument based on ISO 9241-11. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(1), 66-72.
Hahn, S.-E., Sparks, B., Wilkins, H., & Jin, X. (2017). E-service quality management of a hotel website: a scale and implications for management. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 26(7), 694-716.
Han, J. H., & Mills, J. E. (2006). Zero acquaintance benchmarking at travel destination websites: what is the first impression that national tourism organizations try to make? International Journal of Tourism Research, 8(6), 405-430.
Hong, S., & Kim, J. (2004). Architectural criteria for website evaluation–conceptual framework and empirical validation. Behaviour & information technology, 23(5), 337-357.
Hsu, C.-L., Chang, K.-C., & Chen, M.-C. (2012). The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchase intention: perceived playfulness and perceived flow as mediators. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 10(4), 549-570.
Hsu, C.-L., Chen, M.-C., & Kumar, V. (2018). How social shopping retains customers? Capturing the essence of website quality and relationship quality. Total quality management & business excellence, 29(1-2), 161-184.
Huang, K.-T., Lee, Y. W., & Wang, R. Y. (1998). Quality information and knowledge: Prentice Hall PTR.
Hung-Joubert, Y.-t. (2017). Investigating the construct validity of quality measures influencing online shopping in a South African context. Management & Marketing, 12(3), 376.
Jayawardhena, C. (2004). Measurement of service quality in internet banking: the development of an instrument. Journal of marketing management, 20(1-2), 185-207.
Jiménez-Barreto, J., & Campo-Martínez, S. (2018). Destination website quality, users’ attitudes and the willingness to participate in online co-creation experiences. European Journal of Management and Business Economics.
Jing, Y. S., Zaidin, N., Zakuan, N., Ismail, K., & Ishak, N. (2015). Website quality and consumer attitude of online shopping; The Y-generation perspective. Advanced Science Letters, 21(10), 3417-3420.
Kabassi, K. (2018). Analytic hierarchy process for website evaluation. Intelligent Decision Technologies, 12(2), 137-148.
Kamesh, D., Bhanu, J. S., & Sastry, J. (2018). An architectural approach for assessing quality of web sites. J. Eng. Appl. Sci.(Asian Res. Publ. Netw.), 13(15), 4503-4513.
Kang, D., Jang, W., & Park, Y. (2016). Evaluation of e-commerce websites using fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS based on ES-QUAL. Applied Soft Computing, 42, 53-65.
Keeker, K. (1997). Improving web site usability and appeal. Retrieved May, 19, 2002.
Kim, S., & Lee, Y. (2006). Global online marketplace: a cross‐cultural comparison of website quality. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6), 533-543.
Kim, S., & Stoel, L. (2004a). Apparel retailers: website quality dimensions and satisfaction. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 11(2), 109-117.
Kim, S., & Stoel, L. (2004b). Dimensional hierarchy of retail website quality. Information & management, 41(5), 619-633.
Kirakowski, J., & Cierlik, B. (1998). Measuring the usability of web sites. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society annual meeting.
Król, K., & Zdonek, D. (2020). Aggregated indices in website quality assessment. Future Internet, 12(4), 72.
Kuan, H.-H., Bock, G.-W., & Vathanophas, V. (2008). Comparing the effects of website quality on customer initial purchase and continued purchase at e-commerce websites. Behaviour & information technology, 27(1), 3-16.
Lee, Y., & Kozar, K. A. (2012). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision support systems, 52(2), 450-463.
Lee, Y.-H., & Lee, H.-S. (2017). A Study on the Quality Evaluation of the University Information Disclosure Website-A Focus on the Development and Application of Website Quality Evaluation Tools. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information, 20(3B), 1957-1969.
Li, H., Aham-Anyanwu, N., Tevrizci, C., & Luo, X. (2015). The interplay between value and service quality experience: e-loyalty development process through the eTailQ scale and value perception. Electronic Commerce Research, 15(4), 585-615.
Li, Y., Tan, K. C., & Xie, M. (2002). Measuring web-based service quality. Total quality management, 13(5), 685-700.
Liu, C., & Arnett, K. P. (2000). Exploring the factors associated with Web site success in the context of electronic commerce. Information & management, 38(1), 23-33.
Loiacono, E. T. (2000). WebQual™: A Web site quality instrument: University of Georgia.
Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2002). WebQual: A measure of website quality. Marketing theory and applications, 13(3), 432-438.
Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2007). WebQual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of web sites. International journal of electronic commerce, 11(3), 51-87.
Lopes, L. A., & Melão, N. F. (2016). Website content and design in SME: insights from Portugal. International Journal of Electronic Business, 13(1), 70-97.
Loureiro, S. M. C. (2015). The role of website quality on PAD, attitude and intentions to visit and recommend island destination. International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(6), 545-554.
Management, I. (2021). Aims and scope. Information & Management. Available in: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/information-and-management/about/aims-and-scope.
McCoy, S., Everard, A., & Loiacono, E. T. (2009). Online ads in familiar and unfamiliar sites: Effects on perceived website quality and intention to reuse. Information Systems Journal, 19(4), 437-458.
Medeiros, B. P., Goldoni, L. R. F., Batista Junior, E., & Rocha, H. R. d. (2020). The use of cyberspace by the public administration in the COVID-19 pandemic: diagnosis and vulnerabilities. Revista de Administração Pública, 54, 650-662.
Nielsen, J. (2000). Projetando websites: Gulf Professional Publishing.
Ongsakul, V., Ali, F., Wu, C., Duan, Y., Cobanoglu, C., & Ryu, K. (2020). Hotel website quality, performance, telepresence and behavioral intentions. Tourism Review.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L., & Zeithaml, V. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of retailing, 67(4), 114.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of marketing, 49(4), 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). ES-QUAL: A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of service research, 7(3), 213-233.
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & management, 52(2), 183-199.
Park, Y. A., Gretzel, U., & Sirakaya-Turk, E. (2007). Measuring web site quality for online travel agencies. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 23(1), 15-30.
Ranganathan, C., & Ganapathy, S. (2002). Key dimensions of business-to-consumer web sites. Information & management, 39(6), 457-465.
Research, E. C. (2021). Aims and scope. Available in: https://www.springer.com/journal/10660/aims-and-scope. Journal Electronic Commerce Research.
Roy, S., Pattnaik, P. K., & Mall, R. (2014). A quantitative approach to evaluate usability of academic websites based on human perception. Egyptian Informatics Journal, 15(3), 159-167.
Segment. (2017). The 2017 State of Personalization Report. Available in: http://grow.segment.com/Segment-2017-Personalization-Report.pdf.
Shih, H.-P. (2004). An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the Web. Information & management, 41(3), 351-368.
Sun, J., Yang, Z., Wang, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Rethinking e-commerce service quality: does website quality still suffice? Journal of Computer Information Systems, 55(4), 62-72.
Swaid, S. I., & Wigand, R. T. (2009). Measuring the quality of e-service: Scale development and initial validation. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 10(1), 13-28.
Tandon, A., Aakash, A., & Aggarwal, A. G. (2020). Impact of EWOM, website quality, and product satisfaction on customer satisfaction and repurchase intention: moderating role of shipping and handling. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 11(2), 349-356.
Tandon, U., & Kiran, R. (2019). Factors impacting customer satisfaction: An empirical investigation into online shopping in India. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 21(1), 13-34.
Tandon, U., Kiran, R., & Sah, A. N. (2017). Customer satisfaction as mediator between website service quality and repurchase intention: An emerging economy case. Service Science, 9(2), 106-120.
Technology, B. I. (2021). Aims and scope. Available in: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=tbit20. Behaviour & information technology.
Teo, H.-H., Oh, L.-B., Liu, C., & Wei, K.-K. (2003). An empirical study of the effects of interactivity on web user attitude. International journal of human-computer studies, 58(3), 281-305.
Tezza, R., Bornia, A. C., Spenassato, D., & Trierweiller, A. C. (2016). Empirical comparison of the multidimensional models of item response theory in e-commerce. Pesquisa Operacional, 36, 503-532.
Torkzadeh, G., & Dhillon, G. (2002). Measuring factors that influence the success of Internet commerce. Information systems research, 13(2), 187-204.
Tran, L. T. T. (2021). Managing the effectiveness of e-commerce platforms in a pandemic. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 58, 102287.
Venkatesh, V., & Ramesh, V. (2006). Web and wireless site usability: Understanding differences and modeling use. MIS quarterly, 181-206.
Wang, L., Law, R., Guillet, B. D., Hung, K., & Fong, D. K. C. (2015). Impact of hotel website quality on online booking intentions: eTrust as a mediator. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 47, 108-115.
Wang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (1996). Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of management information systems, 12(4), 5-33.
Wang, S., Li, B., & Zhu, Y. (2019). Comprehensive evaluation of usability at the mobile end interface. Paper presented at the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering.
Webb, H. W., & Webb, L. A. (2004). SiteQual: an integrated measure of Web site quality. Journal of Enterprise Information Management.
Wells, J. D., Valacich, J. S., & Hess, T. J. (2011). What signal are you sending? How website quality influences perceptions of product quality and purchase intentions. MIS quarterly, 373-396.
Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information systems research, 16(1), 85-102.
Wolfinbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). eTailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting etail quality. Journal of retailing, 79(3), 183-198.
Zhou, F., & Jia, W. (2018). How a retailer’s website quality fosters relationship quality: The mediating effects of parasocial interaction and psychological distance. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(1), 73-83.
Zhou, T. (2013). An empirical examination of continuance intention of mobile payment services. Decision support systems, 54(2), 1085-1091.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12819/2023.20.2.1
Apontamentos
- Não há apontamentos.
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional.
Atribuição (BY): Os licenciados têm o direito de copiar, distribuir, exibir e executar a obra e fazer trabalhos derivados dela, conquanto que deem créditos devidos ao autor ou licenciador, na maneira especificada por estes.
Não Comercial (NC): Os licenciados podem copiar, distribuir, exibir e executar a obra e fazer trabalhos derivados dela, desde que sejam para fins não-comerciais
Sem Derivações (ND): Os licenciados podem copiar, distribuir, exibir e executar apenas cópias exatas da obra, não podendo criar derivações da mesma.
ISSN 1806-6356 (Impresso) e 2317-2983 (Eletrônico)