User Interface Design Recommendations Through Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

  • Subbiah Vairamuthu
  • Amalanathan Anthoniraj
  • S. Margret Anouncia
  • Uffe Kock Wiil


End users encounter difficulties while spending time and effort in learning and using some software products. Ultimately, the foremost goal of all the organizations and companies developing product lies in the improvement of user’s satisfaction and interest toward the product. One of the methods by which the improvement could be performed is by designing a simple and guiding user interface that is suitable for all the users of an application. Especially, in the domain of information systems, the impediment raises due to the lack of effective user interfaces. The context of use and the end user’s knowledge about user interface pose a strenuous demand in usability. Thus, there is a demand to design interface with utmost care considering the end user’s motor skills and their abilities. Though several laws and principles exist for the stated purpose, effective design involves creativity and some amount of craft which may involve series of procedures, techniques, and tools. However, the decision making in dynamic environments to choose the techniques and tools is seemingly intractable and is complex because of natural trade-offs. Apparently, choosing from existing alternatives will frequently involve making trade-offs that may fail to satisfy requirements. Hence, the selection of alternate solution in lieu of multiple criteria has been challenging. One of the methods that were successful for this objective is multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). This technique defines several approaches for decision making and tries to converge toward the optimal solution. The work attempts to design user interface for any information systems with minimal number of interactions for the different categories of users.


Recommender systems MCDA TOPSIS User interface design 


  1. 1.
    Allouche, A. R. (2011). Gabedit—a graphical user interface for computational chemistry softwares. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 32(1), 174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bihler, P., & Mügge, H. (2007). Supporting cross-application contexts with dynamic user interface fusion. In GI Jahrestagung (1) (pp. 459–464).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blumendorf, M., Feuerstack, S., & Albayrak, S. (2007). Multimodal user interaction in smart environments: Delivering distributed user interfaces. In European Conference on Ambient Intelligence (pp. 113–120).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borning, A. (1981). The programming language aspects of ThingLab, a constraint-oriented simulation laboratory. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 3(4), 353–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buxton, W., Lamb, M. R., Sherman, D., & Smith, K. C. (1983). Towards a comprehensive user interface management system. In ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics (Vol. 17, pp. 35–42).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cardelli, L. (1988). Building user interfaces by direct manipulation. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on User Interface Software (pp. 152–166).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carrer-Neto, W., Hernández-Alcaraz, M. L., Valencia-García, R., & García-Sánchez, F. (2012). Social knowledge-based recommender system. Application to the movies domain. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(12), 10990–11000. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coutaz, J. (2010). User interface plasticity: Model driven engineering to the limit! In EICS’10—Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems (pp. 1–8). Retrieved from
  9. 9.
    Crespo, R. G., Martínez, O. S., Lovelle, J. M. C., García-Bustelo, B. C. P., Gayo, J. E. L., & De Pablos, P. O. (2011). Recommendation system based on user interaction data applied to intelligent electronic books. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 1445–1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Demeure, A., Calvary, G., & Coninx, K. (2008). COMET (s), a software architecture style and an interactors toolkit for plastic user interfaces. In International Workshop on Design, Specification, and Verification of Interactive Systems (pp. 225–237).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dolomanov, O. V., Bourhis, L. J., Gildea, R. J., Howard, J. A. K., & Puschmann, H. (2009). OLEX2: A complete structure solution, refinement and analysis program. Journal of Applied Crystallography, 42(2), 339–341.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Edeki, C. (2015). Automated user interface design for HEPA filter recertification. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 6(6), 652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eisenstein, J., & Puerta, A. (2000). Adaptation in automated user-interface design. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 74–81).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farooq Ali, M., Pérez-quiñones, M. A., & Abrams, M. (2005). Building multi-platform user interfaces with UIML. Multiple User Interfaces: Cross-Platform Applications and Context-Aware Interfaces, March (pp. 93–118).
  15. 15.
    Flecchia, M. A., & Bergeron, R. D. (1987). Specifying complex dialogs in ALGAE. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin (Vol. 18, pp. 229–234).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gajos, K., & Weld, D. S. (2004). SUPPLE: Automatically generating user interfaces. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 93–100).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gajos, K. Z., Weld, D. S., & Wobbrock, J. O. (2010). Automatically generating personalized user interfaces with supple. Artificial Intelligence, 174(12), 910–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garfinkel, S. L., Mahoney, M. K., Silbar, R. R., Mallinckrodt, A. J., McKay, S., & others. (1993). NeXTSTEP programming, step one: Object-oriented applications. Computers in Physics, 7(3), 287–288.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Geuzaine, C., & Remacle, J.-F. (2009). Gmsh: A 3-D finite element mesh generator with built-in pre-and post-processing facilities. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 79(11), 1309–1331.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Golin, E. J. (1991). Tool review: Prograph 2{\textperiodcentered} 0 from TGS systems. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 2(2), 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hayes, P. J., Szekely, P. A., & Lerner, R. A. (1985). Design alternatives for user interface management systems based on experience with COUSIN. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin (Vol. 16, pp. 169–175).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hendratman, H. (2008). The magic of macromedia director. Bandung: Informatika Bandung.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heymann, M., & Degani, A. (2007). Formal analysis and automatic generation of user interfaces: Approach, methodology, and an algorithm. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(2), 311–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hill, R. D. (1986). Supporting concurrency, communication, and synchronization in human–computer interaction—the Sassafras UIMS. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 5(3), 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jo, S., Kim, T., Iyer, V. G., & Im, W. (2008). CHARMM-GUI: A web-based graphical user interface for CHARMM. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 29(11), 1859–1865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J., Michotte, B., Bouillon, L., & López-Jaquero, V. (2004). USIXML: A language supporting multi-path development of user interfaces. In International Workshop on Design, Specification, and Verification of Interactive Systems (pp. 200–220).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lindsay, S., Jackson, D., Schofield, G., & Olivier, P. (2012). Engaging older people using participatory design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference On Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1199–1208).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McCrory, E. S. (1993). Easy and effective application programs using DataViews. In Particle Accelerator Conference, 1993, Proceedings of the 1993 (pp. 1952–1954).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mori, G., Paterno, F., & Santoro, C. (2004). Design and development of multidevice user interfaces through multiple logical descriptions. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(8), 507–520. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Myers, B. A. (1988). Creating user interfaces by demonstration. Boston, MA: Academic Press Professional, Inc.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Myers, B. A. (1992). State of the art in user interface software tools. Carnegie-Mellon University. Department of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Myers, B. A., McDaniel, R. G., & Kosbie, D. S. (1993). Marquise: Creating complete user interfaces by demonstration. In Proceedings of the INTERACT’93 and CHI’93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 293–300).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Myers, B. A., Zanden, B. V., & Dannenberg, R. B. (1989). Creating graphical interactive application objects by demonstration. In Proceedings of the 2nd annual ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on User interface software and technology (pp. 95–104).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nanopoulos, A., Rafailidis, D., Symeonidis, P., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2010). Musicbox: Personalized music recommendation based on cubic analysis of social tags. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing, 18(2), 407–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Olsen D. R. Jr. (1989). A programming language basis for user interface. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin (Vol. 20, pp. 171–176).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Olsen, D. R., Jr., & Dempsey, E. P. (1983). SYNGRAPH: A graphical user interface generator. ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 17(3), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Park, D. H., Kim, H. K., Choi, I. Y., & Kim, J. K. (2012). A literature review and classification of recommender systems research. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(11), 10059–10072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Paternò, F., Mancini, C., & Meniconi, S. (1997). ConcurTaskTrees: A diagrammatic notation for specifying task models. In Human–Computer Interaction INTERACT’97 (pp. 362–369).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pederiva, I., Vanderdonckt, J., España, S., & Panach, I. (2007). The beautification process in model-driven engineering of user interfaces. Ifip International Federation For Information Processing, 4662, 411–425. Scholar
  40. 40.
    Porcel, C., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2010). Dealing with incomplete information in a fuzzy linguistic recommender system to disseminate information in university digital libraries. Knowledge-Based Systems, 23(1), 32–39. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Puerta, A. R. (1997). A model-based interface development environment. IEEE Software, 14(4), 40–47. Scholar
  42. 42.
    Puerta, A., & Eisenstein, J. (2002a). XIML: A common representation for interaction data. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces—IUI’02 (pp. 214–215).
  43. 43.
    Puerta, A., & Eisenstein, J. (2002b). XIML: A common representation for interaction data. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 214–215).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Reinecke, K., & Bernstein, A. (2011). Improving performance, perceived usability, and aesthetics with culturally adaptive user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 18(2), 1–29. Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rogers, Y., Paay, J., Brereton, M., Vaisutis, K. L., Marsden, G., & Vetere, F. (2014). Never too old: Engaging retired people inventing the future with MaKey MaKey. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3913–3922).Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schulert, A. J., Rogers, G. T., & Hamilton, J. A. (1985). ADM—a dialog manager. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 16(4), 177–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shen, J., & Pantic, M. (2013). HCIwedge2 framework: A software framework for multimodal human–computer interaction systems. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 43(6), 1593–1606. Scholar
  48. 48.
    Singh, A., & Wesson, J. (2009). Evaluation criteria for assessing the usability of ERP systems. In Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists (pp. 87–95).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Solovey, E. T. E., Lalooses, F., Girouard, A., Jacob, R. J. K., Chauncey, K., Weaver, D. … Schermerhorn, P. (2011). Sensing cognitive multitasking for a brain-based adaptive user interface. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI’11, January, (p. 383).
  50. 50.
    Sun, Y., Ding, X., Lindtner, S., Lu, T., & Gu, N. (2014). Being senior and ICT: A study of seniors using ICT in China. Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1(1), 3933–3942. Scholar
  51. 51.
    Szekely, P. (1994). User interface prototyping: Tools and techniques. In Workshop on Software Engineering and Human–Computer Interaction (pp. 76–92).Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Szekely, P., Luo, P., & Neches, R. (1992a). Facilitating the exploration of interface design alternatives. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI’92, (pp. 507–515).
  53. 53.
    Szekely, P., Luo, P., & Neches, R. (1992b). Facilitating the exploration of interface design alternatives: The HUMANOID model of interface design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 507–515).Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Szekely, P., Sukaviriya, P., Castells, P., Muthukumarasamy, J., & Salcher, E. (1996). Declarative interface models for user interface construction tools: The MASTERMIND approach. In Proceedings of the IFIP TC2/WG2.7 Working Conference on Engineering for Human–Computer Interaction (pp. 120–150).
  55. 55.
    Topi, H., Lucas, W. T., & Babaian, T. (2005). Identifying usability issues with an ERP implementation. In ICEIS (pp. 128–133).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Vanderdonckt, J. (1995). Knowledge-based systems for automated user interface generation: The TRIDENT experience. In Proceedings of the CHI, March. Retrieved from
  57. 57.
    Vlissides, J. M., & Linton, M. A. (1990). Unidraw: A framework for building domain-specific graphical editors. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 8(3), 237–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wells, L. K., & Travis, J. (1996). LabVIEW for everyone: Graphical programming made even easier. Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wiecha, C., Bennett, W., Boies, S., Gould, J., & Greene, S. (1995). ITS: A tool for rapidly developing interactive applications. Readings in Human–Computer Interaction (Second Edition), 8(3), 373–389. Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wilson, D. A., Rosenstein, L. S., & Shafer, D. G. (1990). Programming with MacApp. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Xiong, W., & Qi, H. (2010). A extended TOPSIS method for the stochastic multi-criteria decision making problem through interval estimation. In 2010 2nd International Workshop on Intelligent Systems and Applications (ISA) (pp. 1–4). Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Zanden, B. Vander, & Myers, B. A. (1990). Automatic, look-and-feel independent dialog creation for graphical user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April, (pp. 27–34).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Subbiah Vairamuthu
    • 1
  • Amalanathan Anthoniraj
    • 1
  • S. Margret Anouncia
    • 1
  • Uffe Kock Wiil
    • 2
  1. 1.VIT UniversityVelloreIndia
  2. 2.University of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations