But what have we created, and what have we just used or extended?<\/p>\n Across our combined careers, we (Jeff and Jim) have published 16 psychometrically qualified UX metrics (both creating original and modifying existing questionnaires) plus a method for combining prototypical usability metrics, and we have made major contributions to a popular standardized UX questionnaire that we did not create, the System Usability Scale (SUS).<\/p>\n In this article, we briefly describe each of these metrics (presented in roughly reverse chronological order by decade) and provide key links to more information about them (so you won\u2019t need to ask ChatGPT and risk hallucinated references<\/a>).<\/p>\n From 2020 to 2025, we developed and published four standardized UX questionnaires: UX-Lite\u00ae<\/sup>, SUPR-Qm\u00ae<\/sup> V2, TAC-10\u2122, and PWCQ.<\/p>\n The UX-Lite has its roots in the UMUX-LITE (more on the UMUX-LITE below). It\u2019s a two-item questionnaire that is essentially a miniature version of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), assessing the perceived ease-of-use and perceived usefulness of products and services with two five-point scales. It\u2019s becoming an increasingly popular metric in UX research and practice.<\/p>\n From 2020 to 2024, we published 15 articles on the UX-Lite, many of which explored different ways to phrase the \u201cusefulness\u201d item because its original wording was overly complex. In addition to demonstrating the reliability and validity of the UX-Lite, it has also proved to be useful in regression and structural equation modeling of higher-level outcome metrics like ratings of overall experience, behavioral intentions (e.g., likelihood to recommend, likelihood to reuse), and actual user behaviors.<\/p>\n The mobile app experience is a unique and defining aspect of our interactions with our devices. While the experience shares many characteristics with using software and websites on a traditional monitor, the mobility, screen size, and interaction style make the experience distinct. Consequently, we developed a questionnaire, the SUPR-Qm, to measure attitudes toward the mobile app user experience. In 2025, we published the second version of the SUPR-Qm, reducing the number of items from the original 16 to five.<\/p>\n We based the TAC-10 on research conducted at MeasuringU from 2015 through 2023 and presented it at UXPA 2024. The TAC-10 is a select-all-that-apply checklist of ten different technical activities. We published six blog articles in 2023 detailing its development, including why there was a need for a measure of tech savviness<\/a> in UX research (to enable discrimination of interface and participant characteristics when analyzing UX data) and how to use the TAC-10 to classify participants into different levels of tech savviness<\/a>.<\/p>\n In our UX research practice, we frequently encounter users and designers who criticize website interfaces for being cluttered and stakeholders who worry about the experiential and business consequences of a cluttered website. But what exactly does it mean for a website to appear cluttered? To answer this question, we developed the Perceived Website Clutter Questionnaire (PWCQ), a five-item questionnaire with two subscales: Content Clutter and Design Clutter.<\/p>\n From 2010 through 2019, we (Jeff and Jim) both collaborated and worked separately on the creation and publication of seven standardized UX questionnaires, plus the publication of books, papers, and numerous articles on how to use and interpret the SUS.<\/p>\n At MeasuringU, we originally benchmarked websites using the SUS. But we knew that the quality of the website user experience was more than just usability, so we developed the Standardized User Experience Percentile Rank Questionnaire (SUPR-Q) in 2011 and published our findings in 2015. The SUPR-Q is a short (eight-item) questionnaire that measures perceptions of Usability, Trust, Appearance, and Loyalty for websites. The combined score provides an overall measure of the quality of the website user experience. The normative percentile database contains responses from more than 10,000 participants and 150 websites (updated on an ongoing basis, about once per quarter).<\/p>\n Our original version of the mobile app questionnaire had 16 items selected from a larger set using Rasch scaling. We list this here for historical purposes, but our current practice is to use the SUPR-Qm V2 (see above).<\/p>\n The UMUX-LITE is a mini-TAM with two seven-point items, assessing perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. It was derived from the four-item UMUX<\/a> (Usability Metric for User Experience) when Jim was at IBM (in collaboration with Brian Utesch and Deb Maher) and is the predecessor to the UX-Lite. At MeasuringU, we prefer the UX-Lite (described above) due to its enhanced flexibility, but the UMUX-LITE is also used in current UX research and practice.<\/p>\n As part of his work on speech systems at IBM, Jim and other collaborators at IBM developed variants of the Mean Opinion Scale (MOS) that had first been published by others in the 1990s. The MOS-X2 is the culmination of that research, a four-item questionnaire that assesses four key characteristics of user experiences with synthetic voices: Intelligibility, Naturalness, Prosody, and Social Impression.<\/p>\n The original version<\/a> of the Speech User Interface Service Quality (SUISQ) questionnaire was developed at IBM and published by Melanie Polkosky in 2008. During its development, participants rated the quality of recorded interactions rather than interactions in which they participated, leaving open the question of the extent to which the findings would generalize to personal as opposed to observed interactions. Collaborating at State Farm, Jim and Mary Hardzinski collected SUISQ data in a large-sample usability study and (1) replicated the factor structure of the original and (2) used item analysis to reduce the questionnaire from 25 to 14 items (getting the SUISQ-R) while still adequately measuring its four subscales: User Goal Orientation, Customer Service Behaviors, Speech Characteristics, and Verbosity.<\/p>\n The Emotional Metric Outcomes (EMO) questionnaire was also developed while Jim was consulting at State Farm. His collaborators at State Farm wanted a standardized questionnaire for assessing the emotional consequences of interaction with a company. They published the EMO in both long (16 items) and short (8 items) versions, measuring four subscales: Positive Relationship Affect, Negative Relationship Affect, Positive Personal Affect, and Negative Personal Affect. The key characteristics below are for the more efficient short version.<\/p>\n The mTAM is a modified version of the TAM (Technical Acceptance Model), a questionnaire developed in the 1990s to assess the drivers of technology acceptance. In its original version, the TAM had 12 items measuring two subscales, Perceived Ease-of-Use and Perceived Usefulness, with items worded to focus on potential future use. For the mTAM, the only modification was to change the focus to ratings of actual use. Note that we do not use this as a practical UX questionnaire, but we have used it when exploring how other standardized metrics work within the Technology Acceptance Model.<\/p>\n![\"Feature](\"https:\/\/measuringu.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/111125-FeatureImage-5-scaled.png\")
<\/a>At MeasuringU\u00ae<\/sup>, we don\u2019t just use UX metrics\u2014we create them.<\/p>\nUX-Lite\u00ae<\/sup><\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links and Publications<\/h3>\n
SUPR-Qm\u00ae<\/sup> V2<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
TAC-10\u2122<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
PWCQ<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
SUPR-Q\u00ae<\/sup><\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
SUPR-Qm\u00ae<\/sup><\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
\n
UMUX-LITE<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
MOS-X2<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
SUISQ-R<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
EMO<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Key Links & Publications<\/h3>\n
\n
mTAM<\/h2>\n
Key Characteristics<\/h3>\n
\n
\n