Usability in mLearning
Ajinkya Atalatti, Elicia Lanham and Jo Coldwell-Neilson
Deakin University, Burwood Hwy, Melbourne, Australia
Keywords: Mobile Learning, mLearning, Usability, Learning Technologies.
Abstract: As higher education students access educational content using a variety of mobile devices, the question then
arises: Does the content across different mobile devices vary in terms of usability? Does usability determine
a user’s willingness to engage in mobile learning? Hence, it is necessary to investigate the usability of the
learning applications and the mobile devices used to access these applications. This paper outlines results
from a pilot study conducted at a large Australian University. The study highlights the importance of usability
across different mobile devices whilst accessing educational content. This research lays the foundation for a
future study that will broaden the investigation to extend from usability for mLearning to usability for
mLearning.
1 INTRODUCTION
Recent developments in mobile technologies have
given birth to smartphones, tablet computers, and
eBook readers, which offer ‘anywhere and anytime’
learning solutions, as compared to the otherwise
stationary mode of learning (Kim et al., 2006).
Learners are trying to incorporate these mobile
technologies to facilitate their learning endeavours at
an alarming rate (Cheung et al., 2011). Mobile
learning (mLearning) is described as the use of
mobile devices for the purpose of education
(Hewagamage et al., 2012). However, every
technology suffers from certain drawbacks, and
mobile technologies are no different (Peterson, 2013).
Furthermore, the success of mLearning depends
completely on human factors (Kukulska-Hulme,
2007). The field of human-computer interaction
(HCI), which deals with interaction between users
and computers, shoulders the responsibility to tackle
the shortcomings of mobile technologies and to
provide sound and effective solutions for the masses
(Zacarias and de Oliveira, 2012). Usability, a subset
of HCI, is the measure of perceived satisfaction and
acceptability of a system by the user (Nielsen, 1993).
Usability in particular is a major concern for content
developers and designers where man meets machine.
Among the factors that affect usability of mobile
devices, battery life and limitations in input/output
devices are important to focus on (Li et al., 2008).
MLearning, an emergent pedagogy, is affected
greatly with systems and interfaces that lack the sheer
essence of usability principles, and is further hindered
since users have access to a library of mobile devices
which are currently available in the market. Every
mobile device sports different features and it is the
responsibility of mLearning facilitators to adhere to
sound usability guidelines when designing content for
users with different devices.
Many practitioners and researchers are focusing
on the implementation and deployment of mLearning
technologies in tertiary education, however, key
factors such as usability are easily being overlooked.
Conversely, mLearning applications are being
developed and tested for usability (Fetaji and Fetaji,
2011), but researchers seem to disregard the fact that
all students do not own the same mobile devices.
Furthermore, researchers are either developing
usability testing systems, proposing guidelines for
mobile learning applications, or exploring the level of
proliferation of mobile devices for learning in the
educational sector. But there is little research
addressing the usability issues of different mobile
technologies, as students view educational content
across a wide range of mobile devices. The following
questions then arise. Do usability factors differ across
various mobile devices? Do certain usability factors
permit the use of a particular mobile device? Do the
principles of usability vary across different mobile
devices?
The problems discussed above and the
overarching research question, ‘Does usability affect
213
Atalatti A., Lanham E. and Coldwell-Neilson J..
Usability in mLearning.
DOI: 10.5220/0005410702130219
In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2015), pages 213-219
ISBN: 978-989-758-107-6
Copyright
c
2015 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
the way users communicate with their devices whilst
accessing educational content?' have motivated this
research study. It explored the popularity of mobile
devices for learning amongst students in the tertiary
education sector and investigated the role of usability
in the adoption of mLearning. This study was
undertaken as part of an Honour’s degree.
The paper comprises of the following sections:
Section 2 outlines the background literature, while
Section 3 describes the survey methodology used
within the study; Section 4 and Section 5 present the
results and discussion respectively. Conclusion and
future work are summarised in Section 6 and 7
respectively.
2 BACKGROUND
2.1 Mobile Learning
In the age of Mobilism (Norris and Soloway, 2011),
learners and students, bound by family, friends and
work-related commitments, are deciding on flexible
learning options such as distance or online learning
(Albion et al., 2012). Although there is no clear
definition of Mobilism, it can be interpreted as the
rapid rate at which mobile devices are being
developed and used for learning, banking, browsing,
online shopping, work, and leisure purposes. In the
first decade of the 21
st
century, as students were
boarding the Electronic Learning (eLearning) and
Blended Learning train, there was considerable
inclination towards the use of mobile devices for the
purpose of learning (Cheung et al., 2011). The phrase
“anywhere and anytime” was brought to life with the
dawn of mobile technology and the Internet (Cheung
et al., 2011; Son et al., 2004). With wireless, mobile,
portable, and handheld devices as a feasible learning
tool, students could learn on the go and manage their
time more efficiently.
MLearning can refer either to mobile devices and
the technology itself, or the mobility of learners and
their experiences of learning using such devices.
2.2 Usability
Jakob Nielsen, in his book Usability Engineering,
defines usability as the combination of five key
elements including learnability, efficiency,
memorability, errors, and satisfaction (Nielsen,
1993). These encompass the three key elements of the
ISO definition (Peterson, 2013) - efficiency, errors
and satisfaction - and add the area of learnability: that
the acquisition of the knowledge of how to use
something should be easy; and memorability: that
when a user comes back to a device after some time
they need not reacquire how to use it. These elements
play a prominent role in the success of mobile
learning applications. Mobile devices offer plentiful
learning opportunities for users, but face challenges
(Peterson, 2013) such as different screen sizes,
different screen resolutions, limited processing
power, moderate input capacity, restricted network
bandwidth, and network unpredictability (Fetaji,
2008a; 2008b; Nayebi et al., 2012; Rauch, 2011). As
the field of mLearning innovations advances by leaps
and bounds, the ultimate success of the learning
pedagogy relies upon the human factors exhibited
whilst using mobile and wireless technologies
(Kukulska-Hulme, 2007). Usability, an essential
attribute of a system, impacts on user’s satisfaction,
learnability and memorability of the contents of a
system to abate interaction errors which provides for
an effective and efficient learning environment
(Fetaji, 2008b).
Usability of mobile devices features a
comprehensive list of hardware and software specific
usability elements or factors that determine the
acceptability and efficiency of the device as a whole.
Nielsen and Budiu (2012) highlighted four key
usability issues with respect to mobile devices: small
screens, awkward input styles, download delays, and
ill-designed sites. Furthermore, they pointed out that
a user’s experience with mobile devices and personal
computers will never be on a level playing field,
leaving users with the hope that websites will be
reinvented for improved mobile usability (Nielsen
and Budiu, 2012). Traxler also discerned
mLearning’s infantile stage in terms of its
technological shortcomings and pedagogical
significances (Park, 2011).
3 METHODOLOGY
This research study investigated the level of
acceptance of mobile devices by students to cater for
their personal educational needs. An online survey
was used for collecting research specific data for the
study. The study entailed participants answering
survey questions relating to a number of elements
such as general demographics, study behaviours,
external commitments, mobile usage, purpose and
frequency of use, future motivation, and usability of
mobile devices. The survey was delivered to students
currently studying information technology at a large,
public Australian university. It was delivered online
via an email link, from a general departmental email
CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
214
account. Ethics approval for the research survey was
obtained from the host institution. All data collected
throughout the survey was non-identifiable in nature
and could not be traced back to the participants. The
survey predominately included quantitative
questions, gathering the data that would address the
research question. However, there were also some
qualitative questions included within the survey to
gather the opinions and thoughts of the survey
respondents.
The design of the survey was informed by the
literature and focussed on the principles of usability
espoused by Nielsen (1993) and Petersen (2013). The
survey results will form the basis of a follow-up study
which will focus on usability of mobile devices to not
only access educational content but also support
learning.
4 RESULTS
The literature review on current mLearning
technologies and usability of mobile devices aided in
the development of the research question. Does
usability affect the way users communicate with their
devices whilst accessing educational content? For the
purpose of data analysis and discussion, the survey
questions were classified into six main categories:
demographic, study behaviour, external
commitments, mobile device ownership, accessing
educational content, mobile usage, purpose and
frequency, future use and motivation, and usability of
mobile devices. In this paper, however, the major
focus is upon the usability of mobile devices whilst
accessing educational content. Other survey results
will be reported in a future publication.
We acknowledge that the reliability of this study
has not been confirmed as this survey research was a
pilot study to discover information on usability of
mobile devices. The information from this pilot study
will be used to perform a larger study that involves
usability testing of learning applications on different
mobile devices which is further discussed in Section
7.
4.1 Demographics
A total of 48 students participated in the survey
comprising of 26 international and 22 local students.
Table 1 details the demographic data of the survey
participants. The participants were also asked to
select the device(s) they currently owned, to which,
46 participants responded that they owned
smartphones, 16 participants said they owned a tablet
computer, and 2 participants said they owned an
eBook reader.
Furthermore, 39 participants identified
themselves as mobile learners (mLearners). Among
the 39 mLearners, 38 participants chose convenience,
31 chose portability, 27 chose accessibility, 16 chose
flexible learning, and 8 chose interactivity as the
reasons for engaging in mLearning.
Table 1: Demographics of participants by age and device
used to access educational content (n=48).
Type of Student sorted
by Age Groups
Use of mobile devices to
access educational content
Yes No
International 18 8
18-19 - 3
20-21 4 -
22-23 7 4
24-25 4 1
26 and above 3 -
Local 21 1
18-19 7 -
20-21 8 -
22-23 4 -
26 and above 2 1
Grand Total 39 9
4.2 Usability of Mobile Devices
The final section of the survey comprised of questions
relating to preferred mobile device to access
educational content, reasons for preferring a
particular mobile device, certain features that
participants disliked about their mobile device and,
most important, the usability of their device(s). The
first question asked the participants to select their
preferred choice of mobile device for accessing
educational content (see Table 2).
Table 2: “I prefer using ____ for accessing educational
content.” (n=39).
Preferred device No. of students
Smartphone 20
Tablet 15
e-Book reader -
Other 4
Table 3 is an extension of the data extracted from
Table 2 and displays the currently owned mobile
devices by students and their preferred mobile device
for the purpose of accessing educational content.
The second question in this section asked the
participants to identify factors that determined their
choice for using the preferred mobile device (see
UsabilityinmLearning
215
Table 4). Further breakdown of factors based on the
type of preferred mobile device is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Currently owned mobile devices by participants
and preferred mobile device (multiple responses, n=39).
Currently owned
mobile device
No. of students
Prefer using
Smartphones
Prefer using
Tablets
Prefer using
eBook readers
Prefer using
Other devices
Smartphone 38 20 15 - 3
Tablet 15 3 11 - 1
eBook reader 2 1 - - 1
Other 3 - 3 - -
Table 4: “I prefer using the above mobile device because:”
(n=39).
Factors
Score
(n=39)
Percentage
(n=39)
Easy to use 27 69%
Ample screen size 17 44%
Content is readable 18 46%
Portable 32 82%
Convenient 29 74%
Internet connectivity 23 59%
Ability to multitask 17 44%
Other - -
Amongst the students who preferred mobile devices,
‘portability’ was the most popular factor followed by
‘convenience’. The majority of students also
preferred using smartphones as the devices supported
‘Internet connectivity’ and were ‘easy to use’. As
expected from relatively smaller screen mobile
devices, very few students selected ‘ample screen
size’ and ‘content readability’ as the determining
factors.
Table 5: Breakdown of preferred device and determining
factors.
Factors
Smartphone
(n=20)
Tablet
(n=15)
Other Device
(n=4)
Easy to use 75% 60% 75%
Ample screen size 20% 67% 75%
Content is readable 25% 67% 75%
Portable 95% 67% 75%
Convenient 90% 67% 25%
Internet connectivity 80% 27% 75%
Ability to multitask 35% 40% 100%
Other - - -
Amongst the students who preferred using a
‘Tablet’ for educational purposes (see Table 5),
factors such as ‘ample screen size’, ‘content
readability’, ‘portability’, and ‘convenience’ were the
most popular, followed closely by ‘easy to use’. Very
few students selected ‘Internet connectivity’ and
‘Ability to multitask’ as determining factors for using
tablets. As tablets offer larger screens, it was expected
that the majority of students would choose ample
screen size and readable content as the prime factors
as opposed to smartphones. Also, tablets being larger
in size and consequentially heavier, they are less
portable and convenient as compared to smartphones.
The third question in this section asked students
to describe what they disliked about their mobile
devices. The collated data was qualitative in nature.
Content analysis techniques were used to identify the
themes in the data (see Table 6). Responses such as
“Lagging sometime/freezes of applications, loads
content slow”, “screen is too small, sometimes hard
to navigate, no physical keyboard”, and “Slower to
load pages, screen can be too small, sometimes
lagging happens.” were grouped under the theme
hardware limitations.
Table 6: “Here are some of the things I do not like about my
mobile device(s)” (n=39).
Issues No. of students
Device Performance 5
Internet connectivity 7
Hardware Limitations 7
Software/OS limitation 8
Battery Problems 7
Content Integration 3
Other 3
No issues 6
The final question in this section asked the
participants to comment on which usability principle
they considered the most important when viewing
educational content on mobile devices (see Table 7).
Table 7: “I find ____ as the most important usability
principle when viewing educational content on my mobile
device(s)” (n=39).
Usability principle No. of students
Efficiency 16
Errors or Error Frequency 3
Learnability 13
Memorability 3
Satisfaction 4
Forty one percent (41%) of the students stated that the
speed and accuracy at which they could perform the
CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
216
tasks was the most important usability principle,
whereas 33% stated that the speed at which they could
use an interface to perform their desired task was the
most significant usability principle. Only 10% of the
students confirmed that the overall satisfaction
derived after using a device or an application was a
notable usability principle, whereas 8% voted for low
error frequency and functional memorability as the
most important principles.
Table 8: Breakdown of preferred device and usability
principles.
Usability Principles
Smartphone
Tablet
eBook readers
Other
Efficiency 10 3 - 3
Errors or Error Frequency 1 2 - -
Learnability 5 7 - 1
Memorability 1 2 - -
Satisfaction 3 1 - -
Table 8 displays a breakdown analysis of preferred
mobile device for learning and the most important
usability principle. This table illustrates that students
who consider a particular usability principle to be
important, on most occasions, prefer a particular
mobile device to access educational content.
Table 9: Cross tabulation of factors, usability principles and
participants that preferred using smartphones (Table 5 and
Table 8).
Factors
(Users that prefer
Smartphone)
Efficiency
Errors & Error
Frequency
Learnability
Memorability
Satisfaction
Easy to use 9 - 4 1 1
Ample screen size 1 - 2 1 -
Content is readable 2 - 1 1 1
Portable 10 1 5 1 2
Convenient 10 1 5 - 2
Internet
connectivity
8 1 5 1 2
Ability to multitask 4 - 2 1 -
Total responses 10 1 5 1 3
Tables 9 and 10 include a cross tabulation to compare
the relationship between preferred mobile device to
access educational content, factors determining the
use of mobile devices to access educational content,
and the most important usability principle. Further
research in this area with a possible controlled
experiment with a larger group would be ideal to draw
solid conclusions.
Table 10: Cross tabulation of factors, usability principles
and participants that preferred using tablets.
Factors
(Users that prefer
Tablets)
Efficiency
Errors & Error
Frequency
Learnability
Memorability
Satisfaction
Easy to use 1 2 4 1 1
Ample screen size 3 2 2 2 1
Content is readable 2 2 4 2 -
Portable 3 1 4 2 -
Convenient 3 1 4 2 -
Internet connectivity - 1 2 1 -
Ability to multitask 2 1 1 1 1
Total responses 3 2 7 2 1
5 DISCUSSION
Due to the limited number of survey participants, it
was difficult to strongly conclude whether these
survey results were an accurate representation of the
entire student population at the University. Further,
the majority of the survey participants were IT
students. However, it was evident that a significant
number of students are currently engaging in
mLearning activities and have access to a range of
different mobile devices. It was observed that local
students were more akin towards using mobile
devices for learning as compared to international
students. The age of the student did not establish any
significance on the use of mobile devices for learning,
however, some patterns were observed amongst
‘digital native’ students, both local and international.
Section 4.2 highlighted different attributes
affecting mobile device usability (Pegrum et al.
2013). Smartphones and tablets have their own
advantages in terms of screen size, convenience,
portability, and ease of use. The results showed that
students used different mobile devices to cater to
different needs, which indicated that usability across
different mobile devices differs and must be taken
into consideration when developing content for a
diverse range of mobile devices. Furthermore, Table
4 presented the issues that can affect the usability of
UsabilityinmLearning
217
a system as perceived by students, such issues are also
reflected in Fetaji et al. (2008) under the following
categories: diminishing the efficiency and
satisfaction during task performance, making
interfaces hard to learn and memorise, and resulting
in unrecoverable errors and high error rates.
Overcoming these hurdles is of the utmost importance
as they are the means to offer sound usable systems
to learners, accessible via different mobile devices,
for effective and efficient learning, and advocating
high rates of satisfaction and memorability, and low
error rates. Upon further investigation, students who
preferred using smartphones for mLearning selected
‘Efficiency’ as the most important usability factor,
whereas tablet users selected ‘Learnability’ as the
most important usability factor. The principles of
usability, thus, vary across different mobile devices
and further research in this area is needed.
Further, in the study were questions that asked
participants to comment on their use or disuse of
mobile devices for learning. The majority of students
engaged in mLearning, pointed towards the
portability and convenience factors of mobile
devices, whereas the students refraining from use of
mobile devices for learning noted factors such as poor
content integration, battery issues, and small screen
size. Given the opportunity, with the potential of
resolving the issues mentioned earlier, 8 of the 9 non-
mLearners had a positive approach towards using
mobile devices for educational purpose in the future.
There seems a strong sense of promise amongst
mLearning practitioners and researchers on the
success and advancement of what could possibly be,
the rapidest growth area in the entire sphere of ICTs
in education (Pegrum et al., 2013).
The survey data presented in this paper shows that
a significant number of students have already
deployed mobile devices in their personal educational
spheres. However, it could be concluded that this
adoption is due to certain features and affordances
offered by mobile devices themselves. Pegrum et al.
(2013) noted the obvious advantage of portability and
convenience factors of mobile devices over the
traditional counterparts such as laptop computers.
Further, the survey conducted in this research study
revealed similar results, exhibiting portability and
convenience as the most popular factors amongst
students preferring smartphones for learning as
compared to ample screen size and readable content
amongst students preferring tablets (see Table 4).
These results therefore demonstrate that students use
a particular mobile device due to its usability
affordance, and the features offered by particular
mobile devices allow for certain usability factors to
stand out. The study also revealed certain aspects of
mobile devices disliked by the students which,
despite portability, convenience, and accessibility,
had a deterring effect on the use of mobile devices.
These shortcomings, although not as significant, can
play a detrimental role on the overall perceived
usability (Raptis et al., 2013). Also, survey results of
the cohort currently not engaging in mLearning,
revealed that usability factors can have a negative
effect on the use of such widespread learning
technologies.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The study aimed at exploring the current level of
adoption of mobile devices for mLearning amongst
tertiary students and to investigate usability’s role in
the adoption process. It was observed that, although a
substantial number of students in this study were
engaging in mLearning, there were certain factors
that inhibited the process of mLearning. As
mLearning is an infantile learning pedagogy, the
potential benefits and affordances are plentiful.
Therefore limiting factors must be addressed early in
the development of any systems or processes so as to
provide a solid learning framework for the young and
growing population of ‘digital native’ users.
7 FUTURE WORK
MLearning’s current stage of infancy and the
limitations presented in this research study have
motivated the contents of this section. Further
research is required with a larger sample group across
different disciplines to cross-reference the results of
this research study, and possibly validate the findings
achieved from this study. In addition, a laboratory
experiment is proposed to investigate if usability
plays a role in the success of mLearning across
various cross-platform mobile devices, and the details
of the experiment are highlighted below.
The laboratory experiment proposed as future
research will focus on usability testing of different
mobile devices. The experiment will comprise of
students that will interact with multiple mobile
devices (smartphones, tablets and eBook readers,
running different operating systems), performing a
series of tasks set by the researcher. The primary
application of focus will be a mobile application
developed specifically for students at the host
university. The participants will be provided with a
CSEDU2015-7thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
218
series of tasks to be performed using a variety of
devices. These tasks will comprise of the different
actions a student can perform using the mobile
application. Observations will be recorded based on
the number of gestures/actions required to complete
the task, participant’s physical and mental state,
interaction delays and so on using a five point Likert
scale. The details of data analysis may vary. Once the
tasks are completed, a post-task questionnaire
focusing on usability guidelines and principles will be
handed to the participants. The laboratory study will
focus on user interaction and usability of mobile
devices while accessing educational content. The
study will focus on testing mobile devices while
accessing educational content with the use of existing
usability guidelines. The purpose of the proposed
study will be to determine the difference in usability
across mobile devices with different operating
platforms while accessing educational content. The
research experiment is built upon the hypothesis that
mobile technologies are proliferating and have sound
implications in the educational sector. Users own
different types of mobile devices and usability differs
across cross-platform, different brands, and types of
mobile devices.
REFERENCES
Albion, P., Jamieson-Proctor, R., Redmond, P., Larkin, K.
& Maxwell, A. 2012, 'Going mobile: Each small change
requires another', in Future challenges, sustainable
futures. Proceedings ascilite Wellington 2012, pp. 5-15.
Cheung, S. K. S., Yuen, K. S. & Tsang, E. Y. M. 2011, 'A
study on the readiness of mobile learning in open
education', in IT in Medicine and Education (ITME),
2011 International Symposium on, vol. 1, pp. 133-6.
Fetaji, M. 2008a, 'Case Study: Analyses of Factors that
Influence Mobile Applicative Software', paper
presented to World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications
2008, Vienna, Austria.
Fetaji, M. 2008b, 'Designing Usable M-learning
Application: MobileView Case Study', paper presented
to World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008, Vienna,
Austria.
Fetaji, M. & Fetaji, B. 2011, 'Devising M-learning usability
framework', in Information Technology Interfaces
(ITI), Proceedings of the ITI 2011 33rd International
Conference on, pp. 275-80.
Hewagamage, K. P., Wickramasinghe, W. M. A. S. B. &
Jayatilaka, A. D. S. 2012, “M-Learning Not an
Extension of E-Learning”: Based on a Case Study of
Moodle VLE, IGI Global, 1941-8647.
Kim, S. H., Mims, C. & Holmes, K. P. 2006, 'An
Introduction to Current Trends and Benefits of Mobile
Wireless Technology Use in Higher Education', AACE
Journal, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 77-100.
Kukulska-Hulme, A. 2007, 'Mobile Usability in
Educational Contexts: What have we learnt?',
International Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning, vol. 8, no. 2.
Li, Q., Lau, R. W. H., Shih, T. K. & Li, F. W. B. 2008,
'Technology supports for distributed and collaborative
learning over the internet', ACM Trans. Internet
Technol., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1-24.
Nayebi, F., Desharnais, J. M. & Abran, A. 2012, 'The state
of the art of mobile application usability evaluation', in
Electrical & Computer Engineering (CCECE), 2012
25th IEEE Canadian Conference on, pp. 1-4.
Nielsen, J. 1993, Usability Engineering, Morgan
Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Nielsen, J. & Budiu, R. 2012, Mobile Usability, Pearson
Education.
Norris, C. A. & Soloway, E. 2011, 'Learning and Schooling
in the Age of Mobilism', Educational Technology, vol.
51, no. 6, pp. 3-12.
Park, Y. 2011, 'A Pedagogical Framework for Mobile
Learning: Categorizing Educational Applications of
Mobile Technologies into Four Types', International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning,
vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 78-102.
Pegrum, M., Oakley, G. & Faulkner, R. 2013, 'Schools
going mobile: A study of the adoption of mobile
handheld technologies in Western Australian
independent schools', Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 66-81.
Peterson, D. 2013, 'Usability Heuristics for eText and
Digital Course Materials', paper presented to World
Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia
and Telecommunications 2013, Victoria, Canada.
Raptis, D., Tselios, N., Kjeldskov, J. & Skov, M. B. 2013,
'Does size matter?: investigating the impact of mobile
phone screen size on users' perceived usability,
effectiveness and efficiency', paper presented to
Proceedings of the 15th international conference on
Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and
services, Munich, Germany.
Rauch, M. 2011, 'Mobile documentation: Usability
guidelines, and considerations for providing
documentation on Kindle, tablets, and smartphones', in
Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), 2011
IEEE International, pp. 1-13.
Son, C., Lee, Y. & Park, S. 2004, 'Toward New Definition
of M-Learning', paper presented to World Conference
on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare,
and Higher Education 2004, Washington, DC, USA.
Zacarias, M. & de Oliveira, J. V. 2012, Human-computer
interaction: the agency perspective, vol. 396, Springer.
UsabilityinmLearning
219
