eISSN: 3023-3267 editor@aimjournals.com
All Journals
Submit your article

Critique Open Research & Review

Open Access Peer Review International
Open Access

An Analytical Approach to Human-Centered Interface Design and Interactive System Development

DOI https://doi.org/10.55640/corr-v04i05-02
PDF
Rafi Pratama 1 , Siti Maharani 1 ,
4 Department of Information and Research Studies, Nusantara Institute of Academic Research, Jakarta, Indonesia
4 Department of Digital Research and Innovation, Nusantara Institute of Academic Research, Jakarta, Indonesia

Abstract

Human-centered interface design has become increasingly important as interactive systems are expected not only to provide functional services but also to support meaningful participation, information use, transparency, accountability, and user satisfaction. This paper develops an analytical approach to human-centered interface design and interactive system development by synthesizing the supplied literature on performance measurement, citizen participation, public-sector information use, electronic government, transparency, and service evaluation. The study adopts a conceptual research methodology in which the selected literature is examined through five analytical dimensions: user needs, information accessibility, interaction quality, participation, and performance feedback. Particular attention is given to the relationship between interface characteristics and the effective utilization of information, because information that is technically available does not necessarily produce meaningful user engagement. The analysis indicates that effective interactive systems require alignment between system functionality, user expectations, decision contexts, transparency mechanisms, and feedback structures. The proposed analytical framework positions human-centered design as an iterative process in which usability and interaction are connected with organizational performance and citizen outcomes. The findings further indicate that participatory mechanisms, understandable performance information, and responsive feedback can strengthen perceived system value, while excessive complexity, information overload, and weak feedback mechanisms can reduce engagement. The paper concludes that human-centered interactive system development should move beyond interface usability toward an integrated model linking design decisions with information utilization, participation, accountability, and measurable outcomes.

Keywords

Human-Computer Interaction, Human-Centered Design, Interactive Systems, User Experience

References

De Lancer Julnes P (2006) The utilization of performance measurement information. In: Holzer, M, Lee, S (Eds.), Public productivity handbook, (2nd edn), Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp. 285-296.
Epstein P (1984) Using performance measurement in local government. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co.
Halachmi A, Holzer M (2010) Citizen participation and performance measurement: Operationalizing democracy through better accountability. Public Administration Quarterly 34(3): 378-399.
Hibbing JR, Theiss-Moore E (2001) Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, UK.
Ho A (2002) Re-inventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review 62(4): 434-444.
Kelly J, Rivenbark W (2011) Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government (2nd edn), ME Press, New York.
Kelly J, Swindell D (2002) A multiple-indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: Correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review 62(5): 610-621.
Kennerly M, Neely A (2002) A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 22(11): 1222-1245.
Lu Y (2007) Performance budgeting: The perspective of state agencies. Public Budgeting and Finance, Winter, p. 1-17.
Lu Y (2011) Individual engagement to collective participation: The dynamics of participation pattern in performance budgeting. Public Budgeting & Finance 31(2): 79-98.
Lu Y, Willoughby K, Arnett S (2011) Performance budgeting in the American states: What’s law got to do with it? State & Local Government Review 43(2): 79-94.
Meijer A (2007) Publishing public performance results on the Internet-Do stakeholders use the Internet to hold Dutch public service organizat
Melkers J, Willoughby K (2005) Models of performance-measurement use in local governments: Understanding budgeting, communication, and lasting effects. Public Administration Review 65(2): 180-190.
Poister T (2003) Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Ruijer HJM (Erna) (2017) Proactive transparency in the United States and the Nether-lands: The role of government communication officials. American Review of Public Administration 47(3): 354-375.
Scharpf F (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
Van Ryzin G (2006) Testing the expectancy disconfirmation model of citizen satisfaction with local government. Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory 16(4): 599-611.
Wholey J, Hatry H, Newcomer K (2004) Handbook of practical program evaluation. (2nd edn), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, USA.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 > >> 

Similar Articles

11-20 of 26

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.