The success of any mobile application relies on its usefulness and rating is considered as an important measure in this regard. This research work focuses on identifying usability factors, which contribute significantly towards the rating of M-commerce apps. This work intends to explore existing usability models consisting of different factors along with a set of criteria and evaluate in terms of rating estimation by considering 5 well-known mobile applications, namely (i) daraz, (ii) shophive, (iii) home shopping, (iv) Symbios. (v) yayvo. Then, this work provides a hybrid usability model for rating prediction of M-commerce applications. The initial hybrid usability model comprises of (i) learnability, (ii) consistency, (iii) human factors,(iv)communicativeness,(v)effectiveness, (vi) Operability, (vii) efficiency, (viii) satisfaction. Each factor consists of some criteria. Keeping in view the factors of hybrid usability model, the data was collected from 40 users for each application. Furthermore, Forward Stepwise Multiple Linear Regression based rating prediction model is suggested by analyzing each criterion of all factors of hybrid usability model. Finally, the model is assessed and validated by using PRED(x) and K-fold techniques.
Giuseppe Attanasio, Beatrice Savoldi, Daniel Chechelnitsky +4cs.CL cs.HC
Speech translation (ST) is increasingly adopted in user applications, yet its evaluation largely focuses on decontextualized testbeds and holistic quality, rather than end users' communication needs. We introduce Ouvia, an evaluation framework for measuring user-perceived usability of speech translation outputs in real-world settings. Ouvia focuses on one-to-one communication: an English speaker needs to convey a request to a Portuguese speaker, and the message is automatically translated. Through a custom web app and multi-phase study design, we collect more than 1,750 such interactions in healthcare and everyday situations, mediated by four ST systems, involving speakers from three English dialects and two genders. We find that modern ST serves people only to a limited extent -- only around half of interactions are rated as usable -- with significant gaps in reported usability across demographic groups. Moreover, among quality metrics, we find that QA-based evaluation is a substantially stronger predictor of real-world usability than standard approaches. Together, these findings stress the importance of situated, user-centered evaluation frameworks that go beyond holistic quality scores and attend to who the technology serves -- and how well.