Cover not available
Article published In:
Information Design Journal
Vol. 26:3 (2021) ► pp.193–215

End-User License Agreements (EULAs)

Investigating the impact of human-centered design on perceived usability, attitudes, and anticipated behavior

ORCID logo | Bentley University
ORCID logo | Bentley University
| Bentley University
| Bentley University
An online survey (N = 810) examined the impact of design best practices on the perceived usability of End-User License Agreements (EULAs). Redesigning a EULA according to best-practices (without changing the EULA’s terms and conditions) led to higher perceived usability while responses to attitudinal (perceived reasonableness of conditions) and behavioral (anticipated agreement and use) items were unaffected. Readers (who reported reading EULAs frequently) (a) provided more positive evaluations of EULAs and (b) were more likely to anticipate agreeing to EULA terms than non-readers. These results suggest that best practices in document design can improve the usability of End-User License Agreements.
Keywords: End-user License Agreement (EULA), human-centered design (HCD), Legal Design, usability, user-centered design (UCD), User Experience (UX)
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The importance of EULA design for organizations
    • 1.2The importance of EULA design for consumers
    • 1.3Prior research on EULA design
    • 1.4The present study
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Experimental design
    • 2.3Displays
    • 2.4Procedure
      • 2.4.1Entrance survey
      • 2.4.2Test phase
      • 2.4.3Exit survey
      • 2.4.4Data analysis
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Entrance survey
    • 3.2Age
    • 3.3Other demographic factors
    • 3.4EULA design
    • 3.5Readers vs. non-readers
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Q1: Applying best practices in human-centered document design can improve the perceived usability of EULAs
    • 4.2Q2: Applying best practices in human-centered document design does not impact attitudes and anticipated behaviors
    • 4.3Brand (unnamed vs. major)
    • 4.4Age
    • 4.5Readers vs. non-readers
    • 4.6Limitations and future directions
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 23 May 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.20018.eri
References (52)
References
Aaker, D. A. (2004). Leveraging the corporate brand. California management review, 46 (3), 6–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albrecht, J. P. (2016). How the GDPR Will Change the World. European Data Protection Law Review, 2 (3), 287–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
AOL and National Cyber Security Alliance. 2004. AOL/NCSA online safety study, (October). [URL]
Bakos, Y., Marotta-Wurgler, F., & Trossen, D. R. (2014). Does anyone read the fine print? Consumer attention to standard-form contracts. The Journal of Legal Studies, 43 (1), 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-bassat, T., Ben-bassat, T., Meyer, J., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). Economic and subjective measures of the perceived value of aesthetics and usability Economic and Subjective Measures of the Perceived Value of Aesthetics and Usability. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 13 (2), 210–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Shahar, O., & Porat, A. (2008). Fault in American Contract Law. Mich. L. Rev., 107 1, 1341.Google Scholar
Böhme, R., & Köpsell, S. (2010, April). Trained to accept?: a field experiment on consent dialogs. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2403–2406). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doak, C. C., Doak, L. G., Friedell, G. H., & Meade, C. D. (1998). Improving comprehension for cancer patients with low literacy skills: strategies for clinicians. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 48 (3), 151–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earthlink. 2005. Earthlink spy audit: Results complied from Webroot’s and Earthlink’s Spy Audit programs, [URL]
Eggleston, K., Posner, E. A., & Zeckhauser, R. (2000). The design and interpretation of contracts: why complexity matters. Nw. UL Rev., 95 1, 91.Google Scholar
European Commission (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/679: General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Official Journal of the European Union. [URL]
Free Software Foundation (1991). GNU General Public License (Version 2, June 1991). [URL]
Gerding, E. F. (2013). Contract as Pattern Language. Washington Law Review, 88 (4), 1323–1356. [URL]
Gomulkiewicz, R. W. (2003). Getting serious about user-friendly mass market licensing for Software. George Mason Law Review, 12 1, 687.Google Scholar
Good, N., Dhamija, R., Grossklags, J., Thaw, D., Aronowitz, S., Mulligan, D., and Konstan, J. (2005). Stopping spyware at the gate: a user study of privacy, notice and spyware. In Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 06 – 08, 2005). SOUPS ’05, vol. 931. ACM Press, New York, NY, 43–52. DOI logo
Good, N. S., Grossklags, J., Mulligan, D. K., & Konstan, J. A. (2007, April). Noticing notice: a large-scale experiment on the timing of software license agreements. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 607–616). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Google. (2020). Privacy & Terms. Retrieved March 16, 2020 from [URL]
Grossklags, J., & Good, N. (2007, February). Empirical studies on software notices to inform policy makers and usability designers. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 341–355). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guo, D., Zhang, S., Wright, K. L., & McTigue, E. M. (2020). Do You Get the Picture? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Graphics on Reading Comprehension. AERA Open, 6 (1), 233285842090169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haapio, H., & Hagan, M. (2016). Design Patterns for Contracts. In Schweighofer et al. (Ed.), 19th International Legal Informatics Symposium (IRIS 2016) (pp. 381–388). Vienna, Austria: Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft OCG, pp.381–388.Google Scholar
Haapio, H., Hagan, M., Palmirani, M., & Rossi, A. (2018). Legal design patterns for privacy. 21st International Legal Informatics Symposium IRIS 2018, 1–6. [URL]
Hagan, M. (2016). The User Experience of the Internet as a Legal Help Service: Defining Standards for the Next Generation of User-Friendly Online Legal Services. Virginia Journal of Law & Technology, 20 (2), 394–465.Google Scholar
Hojjati, N., & Muniandy, B. (2014). The effects of font type and spacing of text for online readability and performance. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5 (2), 161–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jandreau, S., & Bever, T. G. (1992). Phrase-spaced formats improve comprehension in average readers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2), 143–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kay, M., & Terry, M. (2010, July). Textured agreements: re-envisioning electronic consent. In Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (p. 13). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klare, G. (1963). The Measurement of Readability. Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Kurosu, M., & Kashimura, K. (1995). Apparent Usability vs. Inherent Usability. Proceedings of CHI ’95 Mosaic of Creativity, 292–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, D. S., Ko, Y. H., Shen, I. H., & Chao, C. Y. (2011). Effect of light source, ambient illumination, character size and interline spacing on visual performance and visual fatigue with electronic paper displays. Displays, 32 (1), 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minassian, A. (1997/1998). The Death of Copyright: Enforceability of Shrinkwrap Licensing Agreements. UCLA Law Review, 45 1, 570–608.Google Scholar
National Center for Education Statistics (2012/2014). PIAAC 2012/2014 Results. Retrieved March 12, 2020, from [URL]
(n.d.). PIAAC Proficiency Levels for Literacy. [URL]
Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in health sciences education, 15 (5), 625–632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oakley, R. L. (2005). Fairness in electronic contracting: minimum standards for non-negotiated contracts. Hous. L. Rev., 42 1, 1041.Google Scholar
Peck, E. (2019, September 19). The Surreal Reason This Woman Can’t Sue Massage Envy Over Her Sexual Assault. Huffington Post. [URL]
Plaut, V. C., & Bartlett III, R. P. (2012). Blind consent? A social psychological investigation of non-readership of click-through agreements. Law and human behavior, 36 (4), 293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rameezdeen, R., & Rajapakse, C. (2007). Contract interpretation: the impact of readability. Construction Management and Economics, 25 (7), 729–737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Redish, J. (2000). Readability formulas have even more limitations than Klare discusses. ACM Journal of Computer Documentation, 24 (3), 132–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Letting Go of the Words: Writing web content that works. Morgan Kaufmann. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rello, L., Pielot, M., & Marcos, M. C. (2016, May). Make it big!: The effect of font size and line spacing on online readability. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3637–3648). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossi, A., & Haapio, H. (2019). Proactive Legal Design: Embedding Values in the Design of Legal Artefacts. In E. Schweighofer, F. Kummer, & A. Saarenpää (Eds.), Internet of Things. Proceedings of the 22nd International Legal Infomatics Symposium IRIS 2019 (pp. 537–544).Google Scholar
Sauer, J., & Sonderegger, A. (2009). The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: Effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion. Applied Ergonomics, 40 1, 670–677. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snyder, F. & Mirabito, A. (2019). Boilerplate: what consumers actually think about it. Indiana Law Review, 52 (3), 432–453. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sonderegger, A., & Sauer, J. (2010). The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: Effects on user performance and perceived usability. Applied Ergonomics, 41 1, 403–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Summers, K., & Summers, M. (2006). Reading and navigational strategies of Web users with lower literacy skills. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thüring, M., & Mahlke, S. (2007). Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human-technology interaction. International Journal of Psychology, 42 (4), 253–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trakman, L. E. (2009). The boundaries of contract law in cyberspace. International Business Law Journal, 2 1, 159.Google Scholar
Tullis, T., & Albert, B. (2013). Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics. Elsevier, Inc. (Morgan Kaufmann).Google Scholar
Upwork. (2020). User Agreement. Retrieved March 12, 2020 from [URL]
Vila, T., R. Greenstadt, and D. Molnar. (2004). Why we can’t be bothered to read privacy policies: Models of privacy economics as a lemons market. In Economics of Information Security. Vol 12 of Advances in Information Security, eds. L. J. Camp and S. Lewis, 143–154. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Waddell, T. F., Auriemma, J. R., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Make it simple, or force users to read? Paraphrased design improves comprehension of end user license agreements. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings, 5252–5256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Warlick, J. T. (1997). A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? Information Licensing and De Facto Copyright Legislation in UCC 2B. Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, 45 1, 158.Google Scholar
White, A. M. (2009). Behavior and Contract. Law & Ineq., 27 1, 135.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Tully, Laura M, Kathleen E Nye, Sabrina Ereshefsky, Valerie L Tryon, Christopher Komei Hakusui, Mark Savill & Tara A Niendam
2023. Incorporating Community Partner Perspectives on eHealth Technology Data Sharing Practices for the California Early Psychosis Intervention Network: Qualitative Focus Group Study With a User-Centered Design Approach. JMIR Human Factors 10 ► pp. e44194 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.