EID vs UCD: A Comparative Study on User Interface Design in Complex Electronics Manufacturing Systems
This paper reports on an experimental study on user interface design in complex electronics manufacturing systems to measure the difference between ecological interface design (EID) and user-centered design (UCD). Based on cognitive psychology and human factors theory, we conducted a comparative research study. Prototypes of the interface were designed based on the EID and UCD which were undergoing NASA-TLX to evaluation the subjective workload of the users. The main findings of this study were as follows: (1) we found that the ecological interface design and user-centered design had significant differences in each levels; (2) the ecological interface design has a significant better effect on subjective workload compare to user-centered design in the complex electronics manufacturing systems (P < 0.05). The research results can help interface designers to deeply understand the difference between EID and UCD, which could guide the design of user interface in the complex industrial scenarios.
KeywordsEcological interface design User-centered design User interface Complex electronics manufacturing systems
The research financial supports from the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities HUST: (2014QN017). This paper is also supported by the high-level international curriculum projects of HUST.
- 1.ISO, TSISO: 9241–210, Ergonomics of System Interaction-Part 210: Human-centered design for interactive systems. International Organization for Standardization (2010)Google Scholar
- 2.Burns, C.M., Hajdukiewicz, J.: Ecological Interface Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2013)Google Scholar
- 5.Vicente, K.J.: Ecological interface design: supporting operator adaptation, continuous learning, distributed, collaborative work. In: Proceedings of the Human Centered Processes Conference, pp. 93–97 (1999b)Google Scholar
- 8.Hajdukiewicz, J., Burns, C.: Strategies for bridging the gap between analysis and design for ecological interface design. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 48(3), pp. 479–483. SAGE Publications (2004)Google Scholar