<!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>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>E. Tambouris);</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Usability evaluation of eGovernment national portals: The case of gov.gr</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Efthimios Tambouris</string-name>
          <email>tambouris@uom.edu.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Konstantinos Tarabanis</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Stylianos Bourmpoulias</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Marios</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Skiadas</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Vassiliki Koutsona</string-name>
          <email>v.koutsona@mindigital.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Andreas Dimitriou</string-name>
          <email>a.dimitriou@mindigital.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Dionisios Kontogiorgis</string-name>
          <email>d.kontogiorgis@mindigital.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Expertise France Group AFD</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>40, boulevard de Port-Royal 75005 Paris</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="FR">France</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Ministry of Digital Governance of Greece</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>11, Fragoudi &amp; Alexandrou Pantou Streets, 10163, Athens</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Proceedings EGOV-CeDEM-ePart conference</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3">
          <label>3</label>
          <institution>University of Macedonia</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>156 Egnatia Street, 546 36, Thessaloniki</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2024</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>000</volume>
      <fpage>0</fpage>
      <lpage>0002</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>eGovernment's primary strategic priority is to offer electronic services to citizens. However, the complex structure of public organizations often makes it difficult for citizens to find the services they need. In response, governments have adopted web portals as a single point of contact. This research paper evaluates the usability of the Greek government's official web portal called "gov.gr". The study reveals that users encounter usability problems due to the ineffective performance of the search engine, the lack of a minimalist design, and difficulties navigating within the system. To improve the portal, the study recommends upgrading the search engine, focusing on a minimalist redesign, and implementing specific features such as a visible 'home' button.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>One of the main strategic priorities of eGovernment is to provide electronic services to
citizens. However, the complex structure of public organizations has made this initiative
challenging, as citizens often struggle to locate the services they require. To address this,
governments have embraced web portals as a single point of contact for online service
delivery linking all government services and information to a central location.</p>
      <p>In 2020 in Greece "gov.gr" has been launched as the official government web portal1. It
offers citizens access to 1,709 digital public services offered by ministries, organizations,
authorities, and the country's regions. Since its launch, the portal has gained significant
popularity, and aims to be the primary point of contact for citizens and businesses in the
public sector.</p>
      <p>Ensuring user-friendliness in gov.gr design is crucial for its success. However, usability
issues can hinder the user experience. To address this, researchers from the University of
Macedonia, employees of the Greek Ministry of Digital Governance (MDG), and an expert of
“Expertise France” collaborated closely in a joint project to evaluate gov.gr usability. Thus,
the present study aims to disseminate the results of this ongoing project driven by the
following research questions:</p>
      <p>RQ1: Can users easily navigate gov.gr without any obstacles, doubts, or questions?
RQ2: What obstacles or difficulties might users encounter while navigating gov.gr?
RQ3: What are the proposed solutions to improve gov.gr usability?</p>
      <p>The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we outline the overall project
that funded this research. In Section 3, we provide the background and related work of the
study. Section 4 outlines the methodology used to evaluate the usability of gov.gr, while
Section 5 presents the evaluation results. Lastly, Section 6 discusses the research findings,
presents conclusions, identifies study limitations, and provides recommendations for future
work.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. Project Overview</title>
      <p>This research is part of a the “Next Generation of Digital Public Services” project which
provides technical support in the areas of digital transformation and cybersecurity to the
MDG. The project is funded by DG REFORM under the Technical Support Instrument (TSI
2022)2 and is implemented with the support of Expertise France. The main objective of the
project is to implement a common Framework for the next generation of improved digital
public services to the citizens via the “gov.gr” ecosystem.</p>
      <p>The MDG, in an effort to ensure a homogeneous user experience across all domains and
service categories offered by the new digital portal of the public administration (gov.gr), is
aiming at creating the next generation, gov.gr ecosystem, which will operate as the single
point of contact between citizens, businesses and the public sector. This new gov.gr
platform will provide digital services with a common “aesthetic” identity, developed under
a common framework (business and technological user-centric design) and offering
automation by being linked to the underlying business processes, currently organized
within the National Registry of Administrative Public Services “Mitos”3. Moreover, it will
support cross border electronic services for all EU citizens.</p>
      <p>The aim is for “gov.gr” to be redesigned to function as the digital service center, which
will gather all solutions and information that citizens and businesses should be aware of in
their interaction with the administration. In other words, it is intended to operate as the
one and only point of contact between citizens, businesses and the public sector. For this
purpose, a usability evaluation of the current form of "gov.gr" was deemed essential and
that work is presented in this paper.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. Related work</title>
      <p>
        Usability refers to the interaction between humans and computers, including dimensions
such as learnability, efficiency, and user satisfaction [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. According to ISO 9241 it is defined
as the extent to which specified users can achieve specified goals with effectiveness,
efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Various studies have evaluated the
usability of eGovernment portals through expert analysis and user feedback. For instance,
some studies have utilized Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] and mixed
methods combining usability heuristics and automated analyses [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] to assess the usability
of Australian and Alabama county web portals, respectively. Other studies have investigated
the usability of Iraqi [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] and Peruvian [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] government e-portals using heuristic evaluation
methods. Moreover, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] used a questionnaire to assess the usability of fifty US state portals.
Similarly, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ] evaluated a redesigned US state government portal using a think-aloud
protocol. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ] evaluated the usability of the Korean eGovernment portal, while [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]
conducted an evaluative usability test of the Hungarian e-government portal. Finally, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]
investigated the usability of three Dubai eGovernment department portals using
eyetracking methodology.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. Methodology</title>
      <p>The project's objectives and the associated research questions guided the selection of
usability evaluation methods. We used heuristic evaluation and formative usability testing
with the think-aloud protocol to gain insights from usability experts and real users,
respectively. We also collected user feedback through satisfaction questionnaires.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>4.1. Heuristic evaluation</title>
        <p>
          Between October and December 2023, 332 students enrolled in the Department of Applied
Informatics at the University of Macedonia conducted a heuristic evaluation of gov.gr. To
ensure the accuracy and reliability of the results, the students enrolled in the "Information
Systems" course acquired the necessary skills. The students were divided into groups and
informed about the gov.gr website. 40 personas and 44 illustrative scenarios were created
to guide them through the 11 service categories (Table 1). Each group was given a persona
and scenario and asked to explore the website. Students individually evaluated gov.gr based
on Nielsen heuristics [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ]. They identified usability problems, matched them with
heuristics, and provided justifications and screenshots. Afterward, they convened a joint
meeting to evaluate and prioritize the findings for the final assessment report.
“You want to enroll your child in kindergarten.”
"You want to apply online for regular unemployment benefits."
"You are interested in applying to adopt a child."
"You want to schedule an appointment with a doctor."
“You want to change the name of your fishing vessel.”
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>4.2. Formative usability test through the think-aloud protocol</title>
        <p>Between November and December 2023, 34 students from the Department of Applied
Informatics at the University of Macedonia conducted a formative usability test to evaluate
gov.gr. 67 novice users participated in the test, divided into six user groups. The students
assigned tasks to the users, allowed them to freely browse the system, and gathered their
thoughts and opinions while working with it. After completing the user testing, the group
discussed their findings and prepared the final evaluation report.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>4.3. Completion of standardized questionnaires</title>
        <p>
          Between October and December 2023, 57 out of 67 novice users and 191 out of 332
students participated in a study. They completed the SUS [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ] and SUPR-Q [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ]
questionnaires after performing the assigned tasks. In January 2024, a study was also
conducted to evaluate the convergence between the SUS and SUPR-Q questionnaires for
usability assessment. The study aimed to determine if the score from answering the two
usability-related statements in the SUPR-Q questionnaire could predict the score from
answering the ten questions in the SUS questionnaire. This could lead to a more efficient
assessment process for user satisfaction.
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>5. Results</title>
      <p>
        After reviewing the final assessment reports submitted by the students who conducted the
heuristic evaluation on gov.gr, we classified the findings into four main categories:
Navigation (Table 2), Content (Table 3), Terminology (Table 4), and Functionality (Table 5).
We also noted the number of student groups identifying each finding and its average
significance. Additionally, we used the Nielsen significance classification table to
characterize the importance of the findings, where 0= false alarm, 1= cosmetic problem, 2=
minor problem, 3= medium problem, 4= major problem, 5= usability catastrophe [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. After
analyzing the usability reports from the students who performed the formative usability
test through the think-aloud protocol, we identified the most critical usability issues
reported by the users and captured their frequency (Table 6).
2.The user is experiencing difficulty while
navigating the gov.gr website using the mobile
phone.
3.The user may be directed to an external
website with a different structure and
appearance than gov.gr.
4.If the user wants to go back a step in the
service process, they won't be able to save the
data they entered.
5.The user may be redirected to a "dead" link
or icon.
      </p>
      <p>Usability issue
1.The website's home page and other pages
contain too much information, leading to
confusion for users.
2.The website lacks explanatory images that
could assist the user in comprehending its
content.
3.Some system parts and functionalities are
not easily visible to users.
4.The font size, images, and buttons frequently
fail to meet the user's requirements.
5.In the event of an error, the user is not
provided with clear instructions on what to do.
1.It is challenging to find the desired service by
navigating through the 11 service categories.
2.The wording of the services is problematic.
4
3
5
10
1
2
9
2
2
13/69
5/69
4/69
22/69
#Groups
28/69
5/69</p>
      <p>Avg.
significance
2,2
2</p>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>Heuristic</title>
        <p>Usability issue
1.If the user misspells or types a service
differently than its registered name on
gov.gr, the search engine fails to return
results.
2.In case English is selected, the service is
executed in Greek.
3.Other than English, translation to foreign
languages is not supported.
4.Users face difficulty in finding the desired
service when browsing in English.
5.The mobile search feature does not
suggest results to users.
2
2
7
7
#Users
60/67
40/67
27/67
26/69
21/69</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-2">
        <title>Avg. significance 3,17 Heuristic 7</title>
        <p>1."I had trouble using the search bar to find the service I was looking for"
2."I found it challenging to navigate back to the homepage of gov.gr"
3."I found it inconvenient to constantly log into the system for running
service processes."
4."I found it cumbersome to repeatedly enter information already
known to the Public Administration."
5."I found the home page of gov.gr to be overwhelming with too much
text, making it confusing and difficult to navigate."</p>
        <p>Following the research findings, it has been identified that the search bar on the website
and the way the services are categorized present usability issues for users. Users face
difficulties in finding the services because of challenges in identifying the correct search
terms, the lack of spelling error prevention, and the confusing service categories.
Furthermore, the wording of services and the term "life events" is often conceptually
ambiguous, which adds to the confusion for users. Users have found it challenging to use
gov.gr due to the absence of minimalist design, overloaded pages, lack of images and
infographics, poor use of colors and font size, and difficulty returning to the homepage.
Additionally, constant reconnection to the system by entering personal details already
known to the Public Administration has caused annoyance and a loss of willingness to
consume the services.</p>
        <p>According to the results of the SUS and SUPR-Q questionnaires, both novice users and
undergraduate students had difficulty achieving their goals within the gov.gr application.
Novice users rated gov.gr at 64.9%, while students rated it at 67.75% on the SUS scale,
falling into the D-POOR category. The SUPR-Q questionnaire also revealed that novice users
rated gov.gr at 3.5/5 (70% on the 100-point SUS scale), while students rated it at 3.57/5
(71.4% on the 100-point SUS scale), which is the B-GOOD category according to the
proposed SUS scale. However, postgraduate students rated the gov.gr-native digital services
as excellent, suggesting that usability issues may be related to locating digital services
rather than their internal processes.</p>
        <p>
          Finally, it has been observed that the statements in the SUPR-Q questionnaire related to
usability can predict SUS questionnaire score. Even without statistical testing, the evidence
strongly supports this finding, aligned with relevant literature [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ]. Indeed, undergraduate
students and novice users averaged 66.33 on the SUS questionnaire, with an average of 3.7
out of 5 (74% on the 100-point SUS scale) for the first statement and 3.38 out of 5 (67.6%
on the 100-point SUS scale) for the second statement. Postgraduate students scored an
average of 83.75 on the SUS questionnaire and 4.42 out of 5 (88.4% on the 100-point SUS
scale) for the first SUPR-Q statement and 4.27 out of 5 (85.4% on the 100-point SUS scale)
for the second statement. The results suggest that the second SUPR-Q statement is a better
predictor of the SUS score than the first one.
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>6. Discussion and Conclusions</title>
      <p>This study evaluated the usability of "gov.gr," the web portal of the Greek government. The
evaluation revealed that users experienced usability issues mainly due to problems with the
search engine, the absence of a minimalist design, and difficulties in navigating the system.</p>
      <p>To enhance gov.gr usability, we recommend upgrading the application's search engine.
It is also essential to focus on a minimalist redesign of gov.gr, avoiding unnecessary
information on the home and other application pages. To achieve this, gov.gr UI/UX
designers should reconsider categorizing services at the conceptual level (for example, by
adopting a more explicit mental schema) and the design level (by introducing images). It
would also be helpful to implement specific functionalities such as a visible 'home' button
to make it easier for users to navigate to the home page and within the application.
Moreover, we propose rather than using the ten SUS questions, to use a pop-up menu that
only includes the second statement of the standard SUPR-Q questionnaire ("It is easy to
navigate within the website"), allowing users to assess their satisfaction simply and
efficiently.</p>
      <p>During our research in December 2023, the Greek government introduced a digital
assistant (chatbot) on the portal. As a result, we have not investigated its impact on the
usability of gov.gr, which is a limitation of our study. Further research is required to
determine whether both the application's search bar and the digital assistant are necessary.
If it is determined that an effective search engine is essential along with the digital assistant,
appropriate measures will need to be taken to improve the search engine. In addition, as
future work, it would be helpful to assess the digital assistant's usability and the extent to
which it enhances the web portal's usability. This analysis will provide valuable insights
that will enable us to understand the implications of introducing the digital assistant.
Consequently, the results will help to improve the portal's usability and enhance users'
overall experience.
This research has been carried out for the Greek Ministry of Digital Governance under a
project funded by the European Commission (DG REFORM) and implemented with the
support of Expertise France.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Nielsen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Usability engineering, Morgan Kaufmann,
          <year>1993</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2] “ISO 9241-
          <fpage>11</fpage>
          :
          <year>2018</year>
          <article-title>(en), Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts</article-title>
          .
          <source>”</source>
          ,
          <source>Accessed: Dec. 22</source>
          ,
          <year>2023</year>
          . URL: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:
          <fpage>en</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D. H.</given-names>
            <surname>Byun</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>G.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Finnie, An AHP method for evaluating usability of electronic government portals</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Electronic Government, an international journal 8</source>
          .4 (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
          <fpage>343</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>362</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Youngblood</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>S. Youngblood,</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>User Experience and Accessibility: An Analysis of County Web Portals</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Journal of Usability Studies</source>
          <volume>9</volume>
          , (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
          <fpage>25</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>41</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Hussain</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Saare</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O. M.</given-names>
            <surname>Jasim</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Mahdi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A Heuristic</given-names>
            <surname>Evaluation of Iraq</surname>
          </string-name>
          E-Portal,
          <source>Journal of Telecommunication</source>
          , Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC)
          <volume>10</volume>
          .
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>10</lpage>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <fpage>103</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>107</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F. q. Percy</given-names>
            <surname>Santiago</surname>
          </string-name>
          , M. c. Kevin Alonso,
          <string-name>
            <surname>P.</surname>
          </string-name>
          h. Jose Maykol, A. c. Diego David,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E. q. Richart</given-names>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Heuristic Evaluation of Peruvian Government Web Portals, used within the State of Emergency</article-title>
          ,
          <source>International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 12</source>
          .1 (
          <year>2021</year>
          )
          <fpage>679</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>684</lpage>
          . doi:
          <volume>10</volume>
          .14569/IJACSA.
          <year>2021</year>
          .
          <volume>0120178</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Gant</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Gant</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Web Portals and
          <article-title>Their Role in E-Government</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in: Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS)</source>
          ,
          <year>2001</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>1617</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1623</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Withrow</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brinck</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Speredelozzi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Comparative Usability Evaluation for an eGovernment Portal</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Diamond Bullet Design Report #U1-00-2</source>
          , Ann Arbor, MI. Dec.
          <year>2000</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J. E.</given-names>
            <surname>Cho</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Usability Evaluation of Korean e-Government Portal</article-title>
          , in: C.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
          </string-name>
          (Ed.),
          <article-title>Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction</article-title>
          . Applications and Services, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,
          <year>2007</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>64</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>72</lpage>
          . doi:
          <volume>10</volume>
          .1007/978-3-
          <fpage>540</fpage>
          -73283-
          <issue>9</issue>
          _
          <fpage>8</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Szeovay</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Usability of e-Government websites, evaluation of the Hungarian eGovernment portal</article-title>
          ,
          <source>In: Cofola</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          : The Conference Proceedings.
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Bataineh</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B. Al</given-names>
            <surname>Mourad</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Kammoun</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Usability analysis on Dubai e-government portal using eye tracking methodology</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in: Proceedings of the Computing conference. IEEE</source>
          ,
          <year>2017</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>591</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>600</lpage>
          . doi:
          <volume>10</volume>
          .1109/SAI.
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <volume>8252156</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Nielsen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , 10
          <source>Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design</source>
          ,
          <year>1994</year>
          (updated
          <year>2024</year>
          ). URL: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Brooke</surname>
          </string-name>
          , SUS
          <article-title>- A quick and dirty usability scale</article-title>
          , in: P. W.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jordan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Thomas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Weerdmeester</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I. L</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>McClelland</surname>
          </string-name>
          (Eds.),
          <source>Usability Evaluation in Industry</source>
          , volume
          <volume>189</volume>
          (
          <issue>194</issue>
          ), Taylor &amp; Francis, London, UK,
          <year>1996</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>4</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>7</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Sauro</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>SUPR-Q: A Comprehensive Measure of the Quality of the Website User Experience</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Journal of Usability Studies 10. 2</source>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
          <fpage>68</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>86</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>