IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v12y2020i4p72-d346986.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aggregated Indices in Website Quality Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Karol Król

    (Department of Land Management and Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Land Surveying, University of Agriculture in Kraków, Balicka 253c, 30-149 Kraków, Poland)

  • Dariusz Zdonek

    (Department of Economics and Informatics, Faculty of Organization and Management, Silesian University of Technology in Gliwice, Akademicka 2A, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland)

Abstract

Website users have increasingly high expectations regarding website quality, starting from performance and ending up with the content. This article provides a list and characteristics of selected website quality indices and testing applications that are available free of charge. Aggregated website quality indices were characterised based on a review of various source materials, including the academic literature and Internet materials. Aggregated website quality indices are usually developed with a less specialised user (customer) searching for descriptive information in mind. Their presentation is focused on aesthetic sensations. Most frequently, their values are expressed in points or percent. Many of these indices appear to be of little substantive value, as they present approximate, estimated values. These indices, however, are of great marketing value instead. Specific (“single”) indices are of a specialised nature. They are more difficult to interpret and address the subtle aspects of website and web application functioning. They offer great value to designers and software developers. They indicate critical spots which affect the website quality. Most of them are expressed precisely, often up to two or three decimal places, in specific units. Algorithmic tests for website quality, whose results are presented using indices, enable a reduction in the cost intensiveness of tests as well as an increase in their number and frequency, as the tests are repetitive and their number is not limited. What is more, they allow the results to be compared.

Suggested Citation

  • Karol Król & Dariusz Zdonek, 2020. "Aggregated Indices in Website Quality Assessment," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-23, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:72-:d:346986
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/4/72/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/4/72/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lo, Kin & Ramos, Felipe & Rogo, Rafael, 2017. "Earnings management and annual report readability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-25.
    2. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2014. "Measuring Readability in Financial Disclosures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(4), pages 1643-1671, August.
    3. Plaza, Beatriz, 2011. "Google Analytics for measuring website performance," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 477-481.
    4. S. Rolland & Ina Freeman, 2010. "A new measure of e-service quality in France," Post-Print hal-00576616, HAL.
    5. Gao, Lingling & Bai, Xuesong, 2014. "Online consumer behaviour and its relationship to website atmospheric induced flow: Insights into online travel agencies in China," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 653-665.
    6. Belanche, Daniel & Casaló, Luis V. & Guinalíu, Miguel, 2012. "Website usability, consumer satisfaction and the intention to use a website: The moderating effect of perceived risk," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 124-132.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4623 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Ascensión Barroso & Óscar R. González-López & Ramón Sanguino & María Buenadicha-Mateos, 2018. "Analysis and Evaluation of the Largest 500 Family Firms’ Websites through PLS-SEM Technique," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    9. Sukhjit Singh Sehra & Jaiteg Singh & Hardeep Singh Rai, 2017. "Assessing OpenStreetMap Data Using Intrinsic Quality Indicators: An Extension to the QGIS Processing Toolbox," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, April.
    10. Chi, Ting, 2018. "Understanding Chinese consumer adoption of apparel mobile commerce: An extended TAM approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 274-284.
    11. Andreas Giannakoulopoulos & Nikos Konstantinou & Dimitris Koutsompolis & Minas Pergantis & Iraklis Varlamis, 2019. "Academic Excellence, Website Quality, SEO Performance: Is there a Correlation?," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    12. Dickinger, Astrid & Stangl, Brigitte, 2013. "Website performance and behavioral consequences: A formative measurement approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(6), pages 771-777.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mazzoni Leonardo & Pinelli Fabio & Riccaboni Massimo, 2023. "Measuring Corporate Digital Divide with web scraping: Evidence from Italy," Papers 2301.04925, arXiv.org.
    2. Karol Król & Dariusz Zdonek, 2021. "The Quality of Infectious Disease Hospital Websites in Poland in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-19, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lebelle, Martin & Lajili Jarjir, Souad & Sassi, Syrine, 2022. "The effect of issuance documentation disclosure and readability on liquidity: Evidence from green bonds," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    2. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Drago, Carlo & Ginesti, Gianluca & Pongelli, Claudia & Sciascia, Salvatore, 2018. "Reporting strategies: What makes family firms beat around the bush? Family-related antecedents of annual report readability," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 142-150.
    4. Liao, Ziqi & Shi, Xinping, 2017. "Web functionality, web content, information security, and online tourism service continuance," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 258-263.
    5. Qiu, Meng & Gu, Kai & Zhang, Zhichao & Zhang, Junrui, 2023. "Political uncertainty and financial statement readability," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Souad Lajili Jarjir & Martin Lebelle & Syrine Sassi, 2022. "The effect of issuance documentation disclosure and readability on liquidity: Evidence from green bonds," Post-Print hal-03428710, HAL.
    7. Vismaya Gangadharan & Lakshmi Padmakumari, 2024. "Fogging the firm performance: an empirical examination of the annual report readability in India," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(2), pages 211-226, June.
    8. Doshi, Hitesh & Patel, Saurin & Ramani, Srikanth & Sooy, Matthew, 2023. "Uncertain tone, asset volatility and credit default swap spreads," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    9. Chen, Chen & Hanlon, Dean & Khedmati, Mehdi & Wake, James, 2023. "Annual report readability and equity mispricing," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    10. Sun, Li, 2023. "Asset redeployability and readability of annual report," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Prakash Singh & Lokesh Arora & Abdulaziz Choudhry, 2022. "Consumer Behavior in the Service Industry: An Integrative Literature Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-30, December.
    12. Rjiba, Hatem & Saadi, Samir & Boubaker, Sabri & Ding, Xiaoya (Sara), 2021. "Annual report readability and the cost of equity capital," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    13. Chung, Dennis Y. & Hrazdil, Karel & Novak, Jiri & Suwanyangyuan, Nattavut, 2019. "Does the large amount of information in corporate disclosures hinder or enhance price discovery in the capital market?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 36-52.
    14. Mousa, Gehan A. & Elamir, Elsayed A.H. & Hussainey, Khaled, 2022. "The effect of annual report narratives on the cost of capital in the Middle East and North Africa: A machine learning approach," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    15. Tontini, Gerson, 2016. "Identifying opportunities for improvement in online shopping sites," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 228-238.
    16. Gutiérrez‐Ponce Herenia & Chamizo González Julián & Manar Moffadi Awad Al‐mohareb, 2024. "Does corporate governance influence readability of the report by the chairman of the board of directors? The case of Jordanian listed companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 3535-3550, July.
    17. Aditya Aji Prabhawa & Iman Harymawan, 2022. "Readability of Financial Footnotes, Audit Fees, and Risk Management Committee," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, August.
    18. Blankespoor, Elizabeth & deHaan, Ed & Marinovic, Iván, 2020. "Disclosure processing costs, investors’ information choice, and equity market outcomes: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    19. Akram, Umair & Ansari, Aisha Rehman & Fu, Guoqun & Junaid, Muhammad, 2020. "Feeling hungry? let's order through mobile! examining the fast food mobile commerce in China," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    20. Oz, Seda, 2024. "The impact of terrorist attacks and mass shootings on earnings management," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(3).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:72-:d:346986. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.