<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Impact of Characteristics of Individuals on Evaluating the Quantitative Studies</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Patrik Hlavac</string-name>
          <email>patrik.hlavac@stuba.sk</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava Faculty of Informatics and Information Technologies</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Ilkovicova 2, 842 16 Bratislava</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="SK">Slovakia</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Supervisors: Professor Maria Bielikova, Dr. Jakub Simko, Institute of Informatics, Information Systems and Software Engineering, Faculty of Informatics and Information Technologies STU in Bratislava</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Usability studies in the web domain are based on various metrics, but the question is how to apply these metrics to evaluate a larger group of people. When we consider that every user has different qualities, skills and experiences, we could expect that the results of testing of same scenarios will be different. We aim our research to show that quantitative studies can provide more accurate results if we work with information about personal characteristics of participants. We have already conducted a preliminary controlled experiment on a small sample of participants, which explores influence of a web literacy.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;User studies</kwd>
        <kwd>user experience</kwd>
        <kwd>quantitative research</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>UX studies help to focus the specific problems, e.g. understanding
users in order to improve design or functionality. Some UX
studies require the involvement of a large sample of participants,
therefore to conduct a quantitative experiment. Unlike from small
qualitative studies, we don’t have an opportunity to communicate
with participants about the various details, for example to identify
their individual characteristics. Usually it is necessary to use a
large sample of participants, also in some cases it could be
convenient to have a diversified group. Results could be affected
by several impacts, some of which have already been identified
and are described in next section.</p>
      <p>
        A presence of information technologies in almost every area of
our life requires effort of users to adapt to different environments.
Ability to work with such an environment depends on several
factors, including: the duration of interactions, provided
functionality and also on information architecture. It also relates
to user’s behaviour. This is very individual and differs according
to experiences, knowledge, goals, location and social contexts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ].
Evaluation of UX testing could be more precise with additional
information about participant’s skills, e.g. web or computer
literacy. In our work we try to reveal common relations between
web literacy and working in web environment. It is convenient
and tempting to perform an experiment on larger number of
participants at once, especially only in a slight increase of time
cost. When we consider that every user has different skills and
experiences, we could expect that the result of each participant
will be different. We examine a set of non-self-reporting tests and
their ability to differentiate between web literacy among users.
Especially differences in web usage by one of the groups of
participants (either with higher or lower web literacy) should
point us towards better understanding of principles of this topic.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. RELATED WORK</title>
      <p>Almost every research article shows areas in which were found
relations among data, or shows what attributes to focus when
measuring or evaluating for improve results. We consider it
selfexplanatory that we want to expand the study on the reliable tests
to obtain additional information such as a web literacy level.
Effective carrying tasks in the digital space of Web, such as
search for or interference of information, learning, communication
or use of services significantly affect quality of life. Our attention
is directed to the studies that evaluate user interaction with a focus
on individual differences of participants in quantitative studies.
While the usability, as part of the human-computer interaction is
handled for over twenty years, research at present does not answer
all of the questions.</p>
      <p>
        Collecting data from implicit or explicit feedback and further
derivation of various properties and characteristics can be greatly
refined using modern equipment. Existing solutions are based on
monitoring of user behavior using peripherals such as mouse and
keyboard [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1 ref3">1, 3</xref>
        ], from which it is difficult to deduce user behavior.
Current possibilities offer us the gaze tracking and focus content
blocks in the system, or other physiological indicators, which
improve the accuracy of gained information. Collecting accurate
information about the content and the context to which the user
has come into contact, can help us to discover patterns in the
interaction, e.g. determine reading patterns [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. These
opportunities open up the issue of modeling user in still
unexplored fields and contexts.
      </p>
      <p>With the rapid growth of the Web, we could expect the
introduction of the concept of web literacy. At the beginning of
the millennium there have been established several tools for
testing, but they are no longer supported today.</p>
      <p>
        There are several approaches to the term of web literacy. One of
the presented view divides web literacy into three sub-categories:
Web searching skills, Web reading skills and Web evaluating
skills [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]. Another presented approach provided by Mozilla
Firefox framework Web Literacy Map
(learning.mozilla.org/webliteracy), divides the web literacy into essential elements: reading,
writing and participating.
      </p>
      <p>Despite the expectations, we did not find a proven and established
web literacy test. Existing tests for Information, Computer and
even Internet literacy may contain indications of the issues that we
would expect in a web literacy.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2.1 Individuality</title>
      <p>
        Individuality, as a set of characteristics in a given establishment,
distinguishing two people from each other, is considered as one of
the important factors with great impact on the results of the
studies [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]. Already in the study from 1989 were defined three
variables most affecting the user experience: experience with the
system, experience with computers in general and knowledge of
the task domain. Ordinary users do not often even realize the
uniqueness. The basic division is on physical and mental traits.
Individual impacts have gender, age, experience, education level,
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ] experience in the domain [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] and previous experience.
Psychological traits: extroversion, agreeableness, openness to new
experiences, conscientiousness and neuroticism [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        In a study with test of the university website, we take into account
the profession, the daily number of hours spent on the Internet or
weekly computer usage [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        In recent studies, the authors focus on the individuality in domain
knowledge. Another work shows the results, where social
networks could be identified, for example that people open to new
experiences are using virtual communities and Facebook is used
more by extroverts. Author divided individual differences to
physical (sex, age, position, experience) and psychological (based
on the model of the five aspects of personality: extroversion,
agreeableness, openness to new experiences, conscientiousness
and neuroticism) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]. To check the personal characteristics of
users are used questionnaires, often supported by psychological
studies. The questionnaire Big Five is now increasingly
widespread, which follows the model of five psychological
aspects of personality [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Testing gender differences in the interaction with the computer is
relatively easy to make, and used in several studies. A study based
on physical differences showed that the difference in perception
of quality and service or information quality is negligible between
the sexes [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ], contradicting the results of previous studies that
women focus on quality of content [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. Thus it is not entirely
possible to apply this rule on the basis of one result. Experiments
seem to be influenced by other factors. Another study, conducted
on 296 primary school pupils, on the contrary, showed significant
differences when using prepared websites. Experiment stimuli
divided into graphical environment and text distributed
environment divided participants by gender also. It turned out that
girls used the text and textual graphical environment more
successful than boys. These results are attributed to improved
language skills of girls and it is expected that they had a
significant impact on the study. Differences were also discovered
in the searching methods (based on the task); among boys
prevailed horizontal search methods and vertical among girls [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ].
Further research, based on age, shows different behavior for the
age category of 46-55 years old participants regarding the
perceived quality of information resources of virtual communities [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ].
Clustering based on psychological traits showed that good
perception of high information quality is typical for users with
intense personality traits and on the contrary, that people without
extensive features do not have the ability to perceive high quality
information and system quality.
      </p>
      <p>
        One of the latest research was done in national survey of teens
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ], where they analyzed whether participants, which noted
spending more time with social media, felt more literate about
getting information from the Internet. Analyzed correlation
between perceived Internet literacy and hours spent with social
media showed no relations. All adolescent participants have
evaluated themselves as having high online literacy, furthermore
those who spent more time on social media didn’t felt they had a
greater Internet literacy.
      </p>
      <p>
        Many studies nowadays analyze Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) Literacy, such as the research about validation
of a student tool for Technology Literacy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ] with middle grade
students. This study was based not only on questionnaires, but
also on testing a practical task (e.g. in word processor).
Another recent study about rethinking ICT literacy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ] claims,
that concept of ICT literacy has drastically changed in last twenty
years from being very specific set of knowledge of these
technologies, to its current definition of very general and
transversal skill of this century. Such that, also previous simple
measuring of computer use was replaced by integration the
technology across educational areas and understanding it as a
developmental progress in skills and thinking.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>3. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>RESEARCH GOALS</title>
      <p>Evaluation of the UX study results of the random groups can be
inaccurate or misleading if we do not know the basic
characteristics of participants. Interpretation of results also may be
insufficient without more knowledge of respondents which we can
encounter for example in election polls. Random samples could be
sufficient when we do overview studies or surveys, however,
when we do evaluation based on the study, we should know what
is actually a sample of participants that has taken part in testing.
Research objectives in the context of the thesis is very ample. We
want to discover and verify the characteristics that divide users by
some aspects, for example, those which will be reflected in the
speed of problem solving, response correctness and that like.
A current specific objective is to assess the web literacy from the
view of the impact on user engagement. Web literacy as a subset
of Human Computer Interaction is just one of the many needs
when participating on today's user studies. Therefore, our specific
objective is to determine whether the Web Literacy affects the
study. Next, determine in which type of tasks it makes sense to
deal with web literacy and finally propose a set of tests, which are
able to properly measure it. This is closely tied with the ability to
choose the right decision tests for further automatization. It also
opens the topic of searching for connection between the use of the
web and web literacy.</p>
      <p>Besides the internet literacy factor, we would like to find also
other significant impacts with usage of eyetracking devices in user
experience studies. Not quite arising, but also related to the topic
is investigating the impact of web features on the user behavior.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>4. APPROACH AND CONTRIBUTIONS</title>
      <p>Our vision is to propose an evaluation method suitable for
usability studies. As we described in previous sections, our matter
is everywhere present individuality. When we consider that every
user has different qualities, skills and experiences, we could
expect that the results of testing of same scenarios will be
different. We mainly want to find out the impact of web literacy
and to which extent it could affects experimental results.
Currently proposed method consists of a test, which could help to
determine web literacy and as a subset also partially detect
computer literacy. We are also interested in the relations between
different parts of our test. The future way of evaluation will lead
to machine learning methods. In next step we plan to prepare a
mechanism for event logging, which will collect data from
interaction in web environment.</p>
      <p>Our main contribution consists of cleaning the data and adjusting
results on the basis of personal characteristics, in this case a web
literacy. Another benefit lies in defining the user characteristic
impacts which enters the evaluation of user studies.</p>
      <p>Accurate and extended information can help as for evaluating, as
for example, when creating own list of relevant user study
participants. Purpose of our approach is to focus on participants
and their evaluation. Regular user studies would obviously have
an impact on increasing web literacy of participants from the list
and periodical verification would be essential. However, this
approach does not fall under the primary research, so we may
consider it in a future work.</p>
      <p>The scope and testing options depend on the scenario of the study
itself. So if we use tests on the basis of additional tasks, time
requirements which can result in fatigue could be considered as
limiting. In this case it will be necessary to assess the benefits and
success ratio of our solutions with the current self-reporting tests.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>4.1 Our method for estimating web literacy</title>
      <p>Basic idea of the method is comparing participants with greater
literacy and participants with lower web literacy. A prerequisite is
to obtain information from the user's behaviour on the Web. We
believe that we can discover suitable tasks to estimate web
literacy of participants. User experience is verified through the
short test, consisting of three parts.</p>
      <p>In the first part the user is asked to identify the various areas on a
website without specific content. We derived a set of patterns
associated with tasks from real websites. It examines web literacy
linked with the observation position of the various items, such as
"shopping cart" or "search input". In this test, we are able to
compare the response of the user and the primal content, which
can be used later for designing and creating user-friendly web
pages, thanks to the transparency, simplicity, and content
placement following the established standards.</p>
      <p>The second part examines web literacy by selecting the proper
icon in few iterations, such as icons "send email", “refresh” or
“show menu”, The user indicates the knowledge he has gained
from working with web sites and web applications where he has
the opportunity to visually and subconsciously perceive these
pictograms typical for web interface.</p>
      <p>In the third part, we examined user knowledge through a
questionnaire with provided options and open questions.
Questionnaire consist of questions about practical usage of
Internet, mainly the Web.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>5. CURRENT PROGRESS</title>
      <p>We assume that quantitative studies will provide more accurate
results with information enriched with personal characteristics. In
order to discover the different influences, we want to conduct the
experiment on a larger sample of participants. Based on the
detected relations, we try to adjust the results of studies.
We have proposed an outlines for method of estimating web
literacy based on the tracking of user behaviour in a web
environment. This paper is dedicated to researching web literacy
of ordinary users on the internet, especially on websites. Research
is conducted by tests and questionnaire, to more explicitly gather
information about the experience and knowledge of website users.
At first we wanted to monitor user’s behaviour while searching
for the right placing of element in a website layout. This idea was
transformed into searching tasks in standard layout, with random
texts for making the layout a little bit more abstract. There was
assumption that we would get only very short interactions from
such a scenario. With content and preserved graphic pattern
present, it still appeared very unchallenging, therefore without the
need for further thinking.</p>
      <p>The duration of the experiment is unlikely to be significant
because it can be affected by several factors such as the speed of
comprehension, reading speed, and many others.</p>
      <p>
        A pilot experiment was conducted in UX Lab on FIIT STU, eye
tracking device Tobii TX300 was used for data collection. User
sessions are recorded [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ], so we collect data from webcam,
eyetracker and browser screen with interactions like typing,
clicking and scrolling. Thanks to gaze tracking and correctness of
response we had the opportunity to evaluate participant’s
knowledge in various ways. We expect that evaluation can
provide us important clues about common web literacy and web
usability experiences. Our experiment mainly examines web
knowledge of the specific participant.
      </p>
      <p>Web literacy is estimated by using tests. The questions are not
supposed to be answered in a form of self-reporting, but rather by
answering the identified questions (contains common and
wellknown facts and situations on the web). We want to find basic
patterns in searching for areas on the website where we take two
groups of participants as a basis - experienced and less
experienced. Next, we plan to compare the differences in
determining the position of an element, as we further described.
We mainly focus on the variance in the response.</p>
      <p>Online experiment was conducted on a participant sample (N=32,
mean age = 27.34, standard deviation = 12.71). Results of the
second part showed that the selected icons are well known or
obvious, thus they were marked correctly almost without
exception by all participants. In the third test, we identified four
questions without importance, because all participants knew the
correct answer. It is not clear yet, whether there is a correlation
between first and third part of the test.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>5.1 Dataset</title>
      <p>We have decided to use various website patterns, mostly from
frequently visited but not necessarily popular websites. Primal
websites were labelled as “electronics brand”, “movie database”,
“main page of e-shop”, “main page of auction portal”, “faculty
website”, “article from online news” and a “list of flight tickets”.
Firstly, we have edited the screen captures of random websites, so
the content is not clear, but the pattern structure is maintained by
grey regions. Main contours were also preserved. Then
experimental environment adds a thin grid of small cells (20px)
which helps to guide about clicking among the regions. We were
also considering a version of content hiding by blurring all of the
content within region borders, but this seems to be very distractive
or in some cases partially helpful (i.e. the participant could
recognize a specific website).</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>5.2 Experimental Design</title>
      <p>Every user session includes three steps of examination. Not to
distract or to give participant a clue, we have decided to use order
of steps as follows:
First step should examine the user skill in web environment by
asking about placing well known objects like shopping carts,
links, searching bars etc. Experimental environment for second
step was prepared as a set of 16 wireframe schemes associated
with tasks based on previously mentioned websites as on the
Figure 1. Instructions are given to the participant before every
view of stimuli and then he started to search for the spot to select.
Second was the test with icons. We have chosen 15 characteristic
web icons (closely related to browser environment or basic web
tasks). Test environment was created as a dynamic website. This
step was undertaken as a support information beside the third step,
which consists of a questionnaire.</p>
      <p>Third part was a web literacy questionnaire, containing 14
questions (providing 3 or 4 options for each question or open
question) about simple search engine and query tasks, browser
tasks and browsing. Questionnaire was set up in Google Forms
tool as an online accessible and standalone part.</p>
      <p>Order of questions in first and second part was randomly
generated for each participant.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>6. FUTURE WORK</title>
      <p>We plan to involve more participants for greater statistical sample.
By including great sample, we expect to gather larger dataset from
interaction and also greater variability of responses. According to
complete results we will try to apply our method to user
experience studies.</p>
      <p>Still, we knew that after the initial tests the work on quantitative
studies will require a further examination using extensive data. In
next step we are going to prepare a well-known web environment
for event logging. Therefore, further examination with the
machine learning will take a part.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>Acknowledgement</title>
      <p>This work was supported by grants No. VG 1/0646/15,
APVV-150508 and it was created within the Research and Development
Operational Programme for the project University Science Park of
STU Bratislava”, ITMS 26240220084, co-funded by the ERDF.
testing. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human
factors in computing systems (pp. 1347-1350). ACM.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Atterer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schmidt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          , April).
          <article-title>Tracking the interaction of users with AJAX applications for usability</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ding</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Information architecture: the design and integration of information spaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts</source>
          ,
          <source>Retrieval, and Services</source>
          ,
          <volume>1</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>169</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Labaj</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bieliková</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Conducting a Web Browsing Behaviour Study-An Educational Scenario</article-title>
          .
          <source>In SOFSEM 2015: Theory and Practice of Computer Science</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>531</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>542</lpage>
          ). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Móro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bieliková</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Utilizing Gaze Data in Learning: From Reading Patterns Detection to Personalization</article-title>
          .
          <source>UMAP 2015 Ext. Proc. CEUR</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>1388</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sonderegger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schmutz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sauer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The influence of age in usability testing</article-title>
          .
          <source>Applied Ergonomics</source>
          ,
          <volume>52</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>291</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>300</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Şengel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Usability level of a university web site. Procedia-Social and Behav</article-title>
          . Sciences,
          <volume>106</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>3246</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>3252</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kuiper</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Volman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Terwel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Developing Web literacy in collaborative inquiry activities</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers &amp; Education</source>
          ,
          <volume>52</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>668</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>680</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Móro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Daráz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bieliková</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Visualization of Gaze Tracking Data for UX Testing on the Web</article-title>
          . In HT (Doctoral Consortium/Late-breaking Results/Workshops).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Costa</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P. T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>McCrae</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The revised neo personality inventory (neo-pi-r)</article-title>
          .
          <source>The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment</source>
          ,
          <volume>2</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>179</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>198</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conte</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Massollar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mendes</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Travassos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G. H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          ,
          <article-title>September)</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Usability evaluation based on Web design perspectives</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement</source>
          ,
          <year>2007</year>
          .
          <article-title>ESEM 2007</article-title>
          . First International Symposium on (pp.
          <fpage>146</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>155</lpage>
          ). IEEE.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hsieh</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T. Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The Influence of Gender Difference on the Information-Seeking Behaviors for the Graphical Interface of Children's Digital Library</article-title>
          .
          <source>Universal Journal of Educational Research</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>200</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>206</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Len-Ríos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hughes</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>McKee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Young</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Early adolescents as publics: A national survey of teens with social media accounts, their media use preferences, parental mediation, and perceived Internet literacy</article-title>
          .
          <source>Public Relations Review.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Huggins</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ritzhaupt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dawson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Measuring Information and Communication Technology Literacy using a performance assessment: Validation of the Student Tool for Technology Literacy (ST 2 L)</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers &amp; Education</source>
          ,
          <volume>77</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>12</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nielsen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Usability engineering</article-title>
          . Elsevier, p.
          <volume>26</volume>
          ,
          <issue>43</issue>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15] Wilson,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Scalise</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            , &amp;
            <surname>Gochyyev</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>P.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Rethinking ICT literacy: From computer skills to social network settings</article-title>
          .
          <source>Thinking Skills and Creativity</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>65</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>80</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          [16]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tarhini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Liu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The effects of individual differences on e-learning users' behaviour in developing countries: A structural equation model</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers in Human Behavior</source>
          ,
          <volume>41</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>153</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>163</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          [17]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zha</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhang</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Xiao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
          <article-title>User perceptions of e-quality of and affinity with virtual communities: The effect of individual differences</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers in Human Behavior</source>
          ,
          <volume>38</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>185</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>19</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>