23ISO 25000-23Part 23 measurement record

Home / The record / 6.5 Interaction capability measures

ISO/IEC DIS 25000-23.2, 6.5.2 ยท Heading only

6.5.2 Appropriateness recognizability measures

Appropriateness recognizability asks whether a user can tell that the product is suitable for their needs before committing to it. A measure relates correct judgements to the users asked.

The free preview lists this heading and its subheadings but not the requirement text. This page states what the heading requires in our words and never invents the wording.

Not legal advice; does not certify. This page states our reading of a public draft, not the standard's wording, and it is not an official interpretation.

What this heading covers

This family is about the first minute, not the first week. It covers the information a user sees before use: the description, the screenshots, the first screen, the help. The population is a group of intended users, not the product team. The measure can be collected cheaply with a short task: show the entry point and ask what the product is for and whether it fits. A high score here reduces support load and abandoned trials, which is why it belongs in a product quality report and not only in marketing.

Record position: family 9 of 40 in clause 6, under 6.5 Interaction capability, which carries 8 families. It is one of the 40 families a programme has to map its measures to, and its elements are listed below. The heading is 6.5.2 in the public contents; the text behind it is not public.

How a measure for this family is built

Take the number of users who correctly identified the product purpose and its fit as the numerator over the number asked. A stricter version times the judgement and counts only correct answers within the time. Record the users and the entry point, because a landing page and a first-run screen give different results.

Our worked formula

Users who correctly identified the purpose and the fit divided by the users asked, at a named entry point.

Measure elements that can feed it

Number of users, Duration, Number of responses

Chosen by us from the thirty-one quality measure elements named in Annex B. The draft does not publish which elements feed appropriateness recognizability, so the choice above is a worked example, not the draft's assignment.

What to put in place before publication

  1. Name the entry point and keep it fixed for the study.
  2. Ask a fit question, not only a purpose question.

Evidence to keep

KindWhat it looks like
StimulusThe entry point or material shown to the user
ResponseThe judgement given, whether it was correct, and the time taken

The test a reviewer asks

  • Can the result be tied to a named entry point and user group?
  • Is a correct answer distinguished from a confident wrong one?

Two questions to ask

  • Which entry point was shown to the users, and was it the real first screen?
  • Did you ask about fit, or only about purpose?

Where teams usually fall short

  • The product team asked whether the product is clear, with no intended users involved.

What the number cannot tell you

It cannot tell you whether they would still choose it after use. Recognition is the first minute, not the decision.

What happens next

Learnability is the next question: recognition gets a user in, learning keeps them.

Source

ISO Online Browsing Platform, free preview of ISO/IEC DIS 25000-23.2 https://www.iso.org/obp/ui#iso:std:iso-iec:25000:-23:dis:ed-1:v2:en read 22 October 2026

ISO/IEC 25010:2023, Product quality model https://www.iso.org/standard/78176.html read 22 October 2026

ISO/IEC 25023:2016, Measurement of system and software product quality https://www.iso.org/standard/35747.html read 22 October 2026

The rules this is built from

Read from the real rules, not invented.

This page is read from the public record for 6.5.2: the heading in the free contents, and where public, the text the preview carries.

  • Read from the real rules
  • 63 record pages behind it
  • 116 public headings checked
  • Check any line yourself

The measure set is read from the public contents; the model table is read from the public 25010:2023 model. Where the draft text is not public, the page says so instead of filling the gap.

Nothing here is guessed while you wait. Each page is written from the public record and points to the exact page it came from. Record updated 22 October 2026