Skip to main content
. 2023 Apr 6;22:102. doi: 10.1186/s12912-023-01243-7

Table 4.

Usability of ChemoFreeBot

Chatbot usability Mean ± S D Chatbot group (n = 50)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
No. % No. % No. % No. % No %
1. The chatbot’s personality was realistic and engaging 3.64 ± 1.24 6 12.0 0 0.0 14 28.0 18 36.0 18 36.0
2. The chatbot seemed too robotic 1.82 ± 0.66 16 32.0 27 54.0 7 14 0 0.0 0 0.0
3. The chatbot was welcoming during initial setup 4.28 ± 0.67 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 12.0 24 48.0 20 40.0
4. The chatbot seemed very unfriendly 1.96 ± 0.67 12 24.0 28 56.0 10 20.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5. The chatbot explained its scope and purpose well 4.06 ± 0.82 0 0.0 0 0.0 15 30.0 17 34.0 18 36.0
6. The chatbot gave no indication as to its purpose 1.74± 0.78 23 46.0 17 34.0 10 20.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
7. The chatbot was easy to navigate 3.90 ± 1.31 6 12.0 0 0.0 9 18.0 13 26.0 22 44.0
8. It would be easy to get confused when using the chatbot 1.78 ± 0.65 17 34.0 27 54.0 6 12.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
9. The chatbot understood me well 4.16 ± 0.84 0 0.0 0 0.0 14 28.0 14 28.0 22 44.0
10. The chatbot failed to recognise a lot of my inputs 1.98 ± 0.80 16 32.0 19 38.0 15 30.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
11. Chatbot responses were useful, appropriate and informative 4.20 ± 0.53 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 6.0 34 68.0 13 26.0
12. Chatbot responses were irrelevant 1.90 ± 0.89 22 44.0 11 22.0 17 34.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
13. The chatbot coped well with any errors or mistakes 4.26 ± 0.83 0 0.0 0 0.0 12 24.0 13 26.0 25 50.0
14. The chatbot seemed unable to handle any errors 2.08 ± 0.83 15 30.0 16 32.0 19 38.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
15. The chatbot was very easy to use 4.28 ± 0.57 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 6.0 27 54.0 20 40.0
16. The chatbot was very complex 1.58 ± 0.50 21 42.0 29 58.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total score (Mean ± S D) 49.94 ± 5.64
Total mean score after normalizing (SUS score) 78.03 ± 8.82