Usability Evaluation of Mp3/CD Players: A Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach

  • Ergün Eraslan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5619)


Globalization and the competition obliged the user-oriented design today. In the last years, usability has become a highly important research subject. Usability, considering user satisfaction along with the user performance, is one of the key factors in determining the success of a product in today’s competitive market. Product usability is a prerequisite for high customer satisfaction and future sales of companies. Mp3 players and portable CD players are selected for this study since usability is highly important for them. Designing a usable mp3 or CD player is extremely important for users who have close interaction with them. In this study, 14 different mp3/CD players are selected and their usability is analyzed. The usability criteria used in the mp3/CD players’ evaluation are divided into two major categories: performance and emotional expectations. The best alternative is determined with three different multi-criteria decision making methods which are TOPSIS, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and Fuzzy Axiomatic Design Theory (FADT). Although the same data obtained from semantic differential experiment are used for all multi-criteria decision making methods, different rankings are obtained from each method.


Usability TOPSIS Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Fuzzy Axiomatic Design Theory (FADT) Semantic Differential Scale 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wixon, D., Ve Wilson, C.: The usability engineering framework for product design and evaluation. In: Helander, M. (ed.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 665–667. North Holland, Amsterdam (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Han, S.H., Yun, M.H., Kwahk, J., Hong, S.W.: Usability of consumer electronic products. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 28, 143–151 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Isıklar, G., Buyukozkan, G.: Using a multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate mobile phone alternatives. Computer Standards and Interfaces 29, 265–274 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chu, T.C., Lin, Y.C.: A Fuzzy TOPSIS Method for Robot Selection. Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Taiwan (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saaty, T.L.: The Analytical Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill International Book Company, USA (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suh, N.P.: Axiomatic design, advances and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lo, S., Helander, M.G.: Developing a formal usability analysis method for consumer products. In: Proceedings of ICAD, The Third International Conference on Axiomatic Design, vol. 26, pp. 1–8 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karwowski, W.: Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics 48, 436–463 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kulak, O., Durmusoglu, M.B., Kahraman, C.: Fuzzy multi-attribute equipment selection based on information axiom. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169, 337–345 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eraslan, E., Akay, D., Kurt, M.: Usability Ranking of Intercity Bus Passenger Seats Using Fuzzy Axiomatic Design Theory. In: Luo, Y. (ed.) CDVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4101, pp. 141–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Helander, M.G., Lin, L.: Axiomatic Design In Ergonomics and An Extension of The Information Axiom. J. Eng. Design 13, 321–339 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer, Heidelberg (1981)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ergün Eraslan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringBaskent UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations