Evaluating Design Patterns of Commercial Web Applications using Net Easy Score

Full Text (PDF, 860KB), PP.91-100

Views: 0 Downloads: 0


Tharis Thimthong 1,* Thippaya Chintakovid 1 Soradech Krootjohn 2

1. Faculty of Information Technology, King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand

2. Faculty of Technical Education, King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand

* Corresponding author.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5815/ijitcs.2013.08.09

Received: 6 Oct. 2012 / Revised: 20 Feb. 2013 / Accepted: 2 May 2013 / Published: 8 Jul. 2013

Index Terms

UI Pattern Evaluation, UI Pattern, User Interface Design Pattern, Net Easy Score, Usability Questionnaire


Web interface design patterns provide solutions to recurring design problems. Many design patterns use various techniques, which have been proven to be significantly different, to solve the same design problem. Normally, web designers do not know whether users would be satisfied with their chosen choice until near or at the end of the web development process. To obtain user feedback, users are usually asked to interact with a web prototype or the finished web and give their opinion through standardized questionnaires. Net Promoter Score is one of such questionnaires. This scale categorizes users’ responses into promoters and detractors, which makes it easier for companies to understand user satisfaction towards their web. To enable the designers to obtain user feedback early in the design stage, Net Easy Score, a new metric based on Net Promoter Score, was proposed. With Net Easy Score (NES), ease-of-use scores on different design patterns will be divided into a positive and a negative group. The NES is a difference between percentages of positive responses and negative ones. This study examined ease-of-use scores on design patterns for five common tasks in commercial web applications. Results showed that NES and mean ease-of-use score were significantly correlated with an r of 0.965 (p < .000). Also, ranking the average ease-of-use scores and NES revealed the same design patterns identified as the best and the worst ones, which was consistent with the easiest-to-use design patterns voted by participants.

Cite This Paper

Tharis Thimthong, Thippaya Chintakovid, Soradech Krootjohn, "Evaluating Design Patterns of Commercial Web Applications using Net Easy Score", International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science(IJITCS), vol.5, no.8, pp.91-100, 2013. DOI:10.5815/ijitcs.2013.08.09


[1]Alexander C, Ishikawa S, Silverstein M. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. Oxford University Press; 1977. 

[2]Gamma E. Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley Professional; 1995. 

[3]Tidwell J. Designing Interfaces: Patterns for Effective Interaction Design. 1st ed. O’Reilly Media; 2005. 

[4]Van Welie M, Van der Veer GC. Pattern languages in interaction design: Structure and organization. Proceedings of interact. 2003. page 1–5. 

[5]Kruschitz C, Hitz M. Bringing Formalism and Unification to Human-Computer Interaction Design Patterns. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Pattern-Driven Engineering of Interactive Computing Systems. 2010. page 20–3. 

[6]Thimthong T, Chintakovid T, Krootjohn S. An empirical study of search box and autocomplete design patterns in online bookstore. Humanities, Science and Engineering Research (SHUSER), 2012 IEEE Symposium on. 2012. page 1165–70. 

[7]Seffah A. The evolution of design patterns in HCI: from pattern languages to pattern-oriented design. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Pattern-Driven Engineering of Interactive Computing Systems. 2010. page 4–9. 

[8]Khan K, Sahai A. A Glowworm Optimization Method for the Design of Web Services. International Journal of Intelligent Systems [Internet]. 2012;4. Available from: http://www.mecs-press.org/ijisa/ijisa-v4-n10/IJISA-V4-N10-10.pdf

[9]Sauro J, Lewis JR. Quantifying the User Experience: Practical Statistics for User Research. 1st ed. Morgan Kaufmann; 2012. 

[10]Brooke J. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry. 1996;189:194. 

[11]Tullis T, Albert B. Measuring The User Experience. Morgan Kaufmann; 2008. 

[12]Cunningham W, Beck K. A diagram for object-oriented programs. ACM Sigplan Notices. 1986. page 361–7. 

[13]Kunert T, Krömker H. A pattern-based framework for the exploration of design alternatives. Human-Computer Interaction. Interaction Design and Usability. 2007;1119–28. 

[14]Dearden A, Finlay J. Pattern languages in HCI: A critical review. Human–computer interaction. 2006;21(1):49–102. 

[15]Bayle E, Bellamy R, Casaday G, Erickson T, Fincher S, Grinter B, et al. Putting it all together: towards a pattern language for interaction design: A CHI 97 workshop. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin. 1998;30(1):17–23. 

[16]Grill T, Blauhut M. Design Patterns Applied in a User Interface Design (UID) Process for Safety Critical Environments (SCEs). In: Holzinger A, editor. HCI and Usability for Education and Work [Internet]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2008 [cited 2013 Feb 20]. page 459–74. Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/978-3-540-89350-9_32

[17]Welie.com [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://www.welie.com/

[18]YUI Library [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/

[19]Quince Infragistics [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://quince.infragistics.com/#/Main

[20]UI-Patterns.com [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://ui-patterns.com/

[21]Patternry.com [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://patternry.com/patterns/

[22]PatternTap.com [Internet]. [cited 2011 Dec 15]. Available from: http://patterntap.com/tags/types

[23]Chin JP, Diehl VA, Norman KL. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems [Internet]. 

[24]Kirakowski J, Cierlik B. Measuring the Usability of Web Sites. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. 1998 Oct 1;42(4):424–8. 

[25]Lewis JR. Psychometric evaluation of an after-scenario questionnaire for computer usability studies: the ASQ. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin. 1991;23(1):78–81. 

[26]ANSI INCITS 354-2001 Common Industry Format for Usability Test Reports (formerly ANSI INCITS 354-2001). 

[27]ISO 9241-11:1998 - Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) -- Part 11: Guidance on usability. 

[28]Albert W, Dixon E. Is This What You Expected? The Use of Expectation Measures in Usability Testing. Proceedings of Usability Professionals Association 2003 Conference, Scottsdale, AZ; 2003. 

[29]Lewis JR. Psychometric evaluation of the PSSUQ using data from five years of usability studies. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2002;14(3-4):463–88. 

[30]McGee M. Master usability scaling. ACM Press; 2004 [cited 2013 Feb 28]. page 335–42. Available from: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=985692.985735

[31]Tedesco D, Tullis T. A Comparison of Methods for Eliciting Post-Task Subjective Ratings in Usability Testing. Usability Professionals Association (UPA); 2006. 

[32]Tullis TS, Stetson JN. A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability. Usability Professional Association Conference [Internet]. 2004.

[33]Sauro J, Dumas JS. Comparison of three one-question, post-task usability questionnaires. Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2013 Jan 9]. page 1599–608. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1518946

[34]Reichheld FF. The One Number You Need to Grow. Harvard Business Review. 2003 Dec.