Enhancing Social Experience in Home Network Assisted Tools
Authors
Faculty Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka (Malaysia)
Faculty Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka (Malaysia)
Faculty Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka (Malaysia)
Faculty Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka (Malaysia)
Faculty Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka (Malaysia)
Faculty of Major Language Study, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Negeri Sembilan (Malaysia)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.10200444
Subject Category: Human Computer Interactions
Volume/Issue: 10/2 | Page No: 6023-6034
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2026-02-22
Accepted: 2026-02-28
Published: 2026-03-14
Abstract
The quality of social interaction within modern households is increasingly shaped by digital connectivity. However, many existing home network management tools remain technically complex and insufficiently user-centered, limiting their effectiveness in supporting safe and balanced digital engagement. Grounded in usability theory, this study evaluates how a mobile-based Home Network Assisted Tool enhances social experience through improved usability and parental control features. The evaluation framework integrates functional system testing, demographic-based usability assessment, and System Usability Scale (SUS) analysis. Descriptive statistical analysis (mean = 85.5, SD = 6.12) indicates excellent usability performance, supported by a 95% confidence interval within the Grade A range. Additionally, social experience indicators reveal increased parental confidence and reduced supervision stress. Findings demonstrate that usability-centered design in home networking technologies contributes not only to technical efficiency but also to measurable improvements in household digital well-being.
Keywords
Home network, network management, usability theory, social experience, system usability scale (SUS), parental control.
Downloads
References
1. J. Nielsen, “Usability 101: Introduction to Usability,” Nielsen Norman Group, p. Articles, 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. R. Mortier et al., “Homework: Putting interaction into the infrastructure,” in Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’12), 2012, pp. 197–206. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. D. Norman, “The Design of Everyday Things,” Choice Reviews Online, vol. 51, no. 10, pp. 51-5559-51–5559, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. E. Hamid, G. Wan, N. Harum, N. Bahaman, N. A. Zakaria, and A. A. Malek, “A Comparative Study on Home Network Management Tools,” International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 8763–8775, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. ISO 9241-110, “Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction – Part 110,” 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–339, 1989. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. M. Hassenzahl, Experience Design: Technology for All the Right Reasons, Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–95, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. J. Sweller, P. Ayres, and S. Kalyuga, “Altering Element Interactivity and Intrinsic Cognitive Load,” in Cognitive Load Theory, 2011, pp. 203–218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Y. Rogers, H. Sharp, and J. Preece, Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, 6th ed., 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. J. Sweller, “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning,” Cognitive Science, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 257–285, 1988. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. J. R. Lewis and J. Sauro, “Usability and User Experience: Design and Evaluation,” in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2021, pp. 972–1015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
13. J. Sauro and J. R. Lewis, Quantifying the User Experience: Practical Statistics for User Research, 2nd ed., 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
14. J. Brooke, “SUS – A quick and dirty usability scale,” in Usability Evaluation in Industry, vol. 189, pp. 4–7, 1996. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
15. J. McGrenere and W. Ho, “Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept,” Proceedings of Graphics Interface, pp. 1–8, 2000. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
16. B. Shneiderman and C. Plaisant, Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 5th ed., 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
17. J. R. Lewis, “The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future,” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 577–590, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
18. J. Sauro, A Practical Guide to the System Usability Scale: Background, Benchmarks & Best Practices, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
19. G. Wan, “Development of Home Network Management Aid Tool,” Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]