IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p2040-d499124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Usability of Academic Websites through a Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process

Author

Listed:
  • AbdulHafeez Muhammad

    (Department of Computer Sciences, Bahria University Lahore Campus, Islamabad 54600, Pakistan)

  • Ansar Siddique

    (Department of Software Engineering, University of Gujrat, Punjab 50700, Pakistan)

  • Quadri Noorulhasan Naveed

    (College of Computer Science, King Khalid University, Abha 62529, Saudi Arabia)

  • Uzma Khaliq

    (Department of Computer Sciences, Bahria University Lahore Campus, Islamabad 54600, Pakistan)

  • Ali M. Aseere

    (College of Computer Science, King Khalid University, Abha 62529, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mohd Abul Hasan

    (College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61413, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mohamed Rafik N. Qureshi

    (College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61413, Saudi Arabia)

  • Basit Shahzad

    (Department of Software Engineering, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan)

Abstract

In the higher education sector, there is a growing trend to offer academic information to users through websites. Contemporarily, the users (i.e., students/teachers, parents, and administrative staff) greatly rely on these websites to perform various academic tasks, including admission, access to learning management systems (LMS), and links to other relevant resources. These users vary from each other in terms of their technological competence, objectives, and frequency of use. Therefore, academic websites should be designed considering different dimensions, so that everybody can be accommodated. Knowing the different dimensions with respect to the usability of academic websites is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) approach has been considered to be a significant method to deal with the uncertainty that is involved in subjective judgment. Although a wide range of usability factors for academic websites have already been identified, most of them are based on the judgment of experts who have never used these websites. This study identified important factors through a detailed literature review, classified them, and prioritized the most critical among them through the FAHP methodology, involving relevant users to propose a usability evaluation framework for academic websites. To validate the proposed framework, five websites of renowned higher educational institutes (HEIs) were evaluated and ranked according to the usability criteria. As the proposed framework was created methodically, the authors believe that it would be helpful for detecting real usability issues that currently exist in academic websites.

Suggested Citation

  • AbdulHafeez Muhammad & Ansar Siddique & Quadri Noorulhasan Naveed & Uzma Khaliq & Ali M. Aseere & Mohd Abul Hasan & Mohamed Rafik N. Qureshi & Basit Shahzad, 2021. "Evaluating Usability of Academic Websites through a Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2040-:d:499124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2040/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2040/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ersin Caglar & S. Ahmet Mentes, 2012. "The usability of university websites - a study on European University of Lefke," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 22-40.
    2. Michele Bernasconi & Christine Choirat & Raffaello Seri, 2010. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Theory of Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 699-711, April.
    3. Sharmistha Roy & Prasant Kumar Pattnaik & Rajib Mall, 2017. "Quality assurance of academic websites using usability testing: an experimental study with AHP," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, March.
    4. Renuka Nagpal & Deepti Mehrotra & Pradeep Kr. Bhatia, 2016. "Usability evaluation of website using combined weighted method: fuzzy AHP and entropy approach," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 7(4), pages 408-417, December.
    5. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    6. Kem Saichaie & Christopher C. Morphew, 2014. "What College and University Websites Reveal about the Purposes of Higher Education," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 85(4), pages 499-530, July.
    7. Emanuele Salerno, 2020. "Identifying Value-Increasing Actions for Cultural Heritage Assets through Sensitivity Analysis of Multicriteria Evaluation Results," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Quadri Noorulhasan Naveed & Adel Ibrahim Qahmash & Mohamed Rafik N. Qureshi & Naim Ahmad & Mohammed Aref Abdul Rasheed & Md Akhtaruzzaman, 2023. "Analyzing Critical Success Factors for Sustainable Cloud-Based Mobile Learning (CBML) in Crisp and Fuzzy Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Mei-Hui Peng & Bireswar Dutta, 2023. "The Mediating Effects of Innovativeness and System Usability on Students’ Personality Differences: Recommendations for E-Learning Platforms in the Post-Pandemic Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Majid H. Alsulami & Mashael M. Khayyat & Omar I. Aboulola & Mohammed S. Alsaqer, 2021. "Development of an Approach to Evaluate Website Effectiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Ertugrul Ayyildiz & Mirac Murat & Gul Imamoglu & Yildiz Kose, 2023. "A novel hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate universities based on student perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 55-86, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Akshay Hinduja & Manju Pandey, 2019. "A Distance-based Method for Computing Priorities of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relation and Its Application in AHP," Vision, , vol. 23(4), pages 329-340, December.
    2. Benyou Jia & Slobodan P. Simonovic & Pingan Zhong & Zhongbo Yu, 2016. "A Multi-Objective Best Compromise Decision Model for Real-Time Flood Mitigation Operations of Multi-Reservoir System," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(10), pages 3363-3387, August.
    3. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon & Wirachchaya Chanpuypetch, 2024. "Navigating Supply Chain Resilience: A Hybrid Approach to Agri-Food Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-41, May.
    4. Juan Carlos Martín & Veronika Rudchenko & María-Victoria Sánchez-Rebull, 2020. "The Role of Nationality and Hotel Class on Guests’ Satisfaction. A Fuzzy-TOPSIS Approach Applied in Saint Petersburg," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Jelena Lukić & Mirjana Misita & Dragan D. Milanović & Ankica Borota-Tišma & Aleksandra Janković, 2022. "Determining the Risk Level in Client Analysis by Applying Fuzzy Logic in Insurance Sector," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Ashish Kumar & Muskaan Arora & Monika Saini, 2023. "Influence of mathematics on the academic performance of mechanical engineering students: a PLS-SEM approach," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(1), pages 367-376, February.
    7. Sharma, Mahak & Antony, Rose & Sehrawat, Rajat & Cruz, Angel Contreras & Daim, Tugrul U., 2022. "Exploring post-adoption behaviors of e-service users: Evidence from the hospitality sector /online travel services," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Chia-Nan Wang & Ngoc-Ai-Thy Nguyen & Thanh-Tuan Dang & Chen-Ming Lu, 2021. "A Compromised Decision-Making Approach to Third-Party Logistics Selection in Sustainable Supply Chain Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy VIKOR Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-27, April.
    10. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    11. Lupo, Toni, 2015. "Fuzzy ServPerf model combined with ELECTRE III to comparatively evaluate service quality of international airports in Sicily," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 249-259.
    12. Lixin Shen & Kannan Govindan & Madan Shankar, 2015. "Evaluation of Barriers of Corporate Social Responsibility Using an Analytical Hierarchy Process under a Fuzzy Environment—A Textile Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-22, March.
    13. He-Yau Kang & Amy H. I. Lee & Tzu-Ting Huang, 2016. "Project Management for a Wind Turbine Construction by Applying Fuzzy Multiple Objective Linear Programming Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Noori, Amir & Bonakdari, Hossein & Salimi, Amir Hossein & Gharabaghi, Bahram, 2021. "A group Multi-Criteria Decision-Making method for water supply choice optimization," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Wang, Xiaojun & Chan, Hing Kai & Li, Dong, 2015. "A case study of an integrated fuzzy methodology for green product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 212-223.
    16. Animesh Biswas & Samir Kumar, 2019. "Generalization of extent analysis method for solving multicriteria decision making problems involving intuitionistic fuzzy numbers," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 56(4), pages 1142-1166, December.
    17. Ezgi Güler & Süheyla Yerel Kandemir, 2024. "Analysis of PM 10 Substances via Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision-Making and Statistical Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-23, September.
    18. Bojan Srdjevic & Yvonilde Medeiros, 2008. "Fuzzy AHP Assessment of Water Management Plans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(7), pages 877-894, July.
    19. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    20. Nitidetch Koohathongsumrit & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2022. "An integrated FAHP–ZODP approach for strategic marketing information system project selection," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1792-1809, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2040-:d:499124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.