After design adjustments, the LAD achieved good–excellent usability (SUS M = 4.13, equal to 78.25%)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2027: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Usability reassessment with the SUS after design adjustments yielded M = 4.13 (SD = 0.46), equal to 78.25%, interpretable as good–excellent usability. → de Vreugd 2024
Evidence¶
de Vreugd 2024¶
de Vreugd, L., van Leeuwen, A., Jansen, R., & van der Schaaf, M. (2024). Learning Analytics Dashboard Design and Evaluation to Support Student Self-Regulation of Study Behaviour. Journal of Learning Analytics, 11(3), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2024.8529
q2 · i? · design · r3
A survey of 42 participants from various study programs completed the ten-item SUS embedded in the adjusted LAD. The score "equals 78.25%, interpretable as good–excellent usability"; item 1 on frequent use scored relatively low (M = 3.00).
"Usability reassessment with the SUS resulted in a score of M = 4.13 and SD = 0.46 . This score equals 78.25%, interpretable as good–excellent usability (Bangor et al., 2009)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Older adults rated the KOKU digital programme with excellent usability and high acceptability — related
- Special-education practitioners rated AdaptED Stories as strongly usable, with a mean SUS score of 86.8 corresponding to an A grade — related
- The Bloom classification UI shows low perceived workload and high usability in a 50-participant user study — related
- The FACTRIA-aware chatbot received good usability ratings (SUS 70.84) and high usefulness ratings from most of the 11 stakeholders — related
- Adults rated the LLM-powered iCub storytelling system as usable, with a total SUS score of 76.70 indicating good product usability — related
- The system receives a good average usability rating (SUS 69.7, grade B) but with wide individual variation, which the authors take to suggest UI consistency issues — related
- Learner acceptance of AI simulations is generally high, with System Usability Scale scores of 61.6 to 78.56 and 72%-93% willingness to recommend — related
- Students and tutors rated predetermined LAD constructs similarly in importance but differed in suggesting and ranking new constructs — related
- Students rated AISSA's usability as excellent, with an average SUS score of 83.38 from 30 of 46 pilot students — related
- Experimental-group participants rated TibetCPR highly usable (SUS = 84.3, an Excellent rating), with the highest items on voluntary engagement and independent use — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
thermos-lad-sus-good-excellent-usability |
title |
After design adjustments, the LAD achieved good–excellent usability (SUS M = 4.13, equal to 78.25%) |
description |
After design adjustments, the LAD achieved good–excellent usability (SUS M = 4.13, equal to 78.25%) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
recheck_by |
2027 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — de-vreugd-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.