All websites were presented three times to each participant in varying durations (50 ms, 500 ms, and 10 s), and each site was rated regarding its trustworthiness, visual appeal, and perceived usability.
A total of 60 people (30 male, 30 female) participated in a laboratory experiment, where 20 website startpages had to be rated regarding symmetry, intuitive beauty, classical and expressive aesthetics.
Second, the preliminary item pool was rated regarding face validity (the extent to which an item appears to measure usefulness) and wording, including independent external raters (N = 18).
In addition, it was shown that the selected constructs were rated differently regarding importance, which allowed the composition of four styles (Table 6).
Despite these encouraging general results, not all the topics in the program were rated equally regarding their usefulness for the daily work of organizations.
All packs in light colours or with descriptors such as 'additive free' were more positively rated regarding harmfulness.
In other words: "How relevant are the different environments for this specific business model?" In addition to the compatibility of the "OEM scenario" – "business model," all combinations of scenarios were rated with regard to their compatibility in a workshop.
The items were rated with regard to various pre-defined criteria and then refined in a stepwise process by international experts.
Self-help books were rated highly with regard to meeting participants' expectations towards convenience of access, anonymity and waiting time.
All those results should be considered with caution as each of the three studies was rated unclear regarding risk of bias.
