How to Include Users in the Design and Development of Cyberinfrastructures?

  • Hashim Iqbal ChunpirEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10918)


Cyberinfrastructures have reached their production level as far as their capability to serve researchers and connect big data is concerned. However, users face difficulties while they perform complex operations via cyberinfrastructures by using their user interfaces (UIs), for big data analysis and research. Using these infrastructures users perform operations such as data access, data visualization to complete their research activities. Unfortunately, there are not enough studies and projects conducted so far that provides guidelines to developers to design and develop interfaces that meet user requirements in cyberinfrastructures. These infrastructures are also known as e-infrastructures, big data infrastructures, open data infrastructures, virtual research environments. In this work, guidelines are recommended so that user requirements can directly be incorporated into the design and development of cyberinfrastructure applications serving a particular target audience. In this paper, an example of a cyberinfrastructure is given, using which users can be involved in its design and the development. These techniques can then also be transferred to the designers and developers of other cyberinfrastructures to improve the user experience as well as usability of UIs and associated services. Furthermore, these techniques can be enhanced even further and generalized to meet the requirements of users of applications other than cyberinfrastructures.


e-Research e-Science User experience (UX) Human computer interaction (HCI) Open data Cyberinfrastructure (CI) e-Infrastructures Usability Big data infrastructures Citizen science 


  1. 1.
    Karasti, H., Millerand, F., Hine, C.M.: Knowledge infrastructures: part I. Sci. Technol. Stud. 29(1), 2–12 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Demchenko, Y., Zhao, Z., Grosso, P., Wibisono, A., De Laat, C.: 2012 IEEE 4th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science Addressing Big Data Challenges for Scientific Data Infrastructure, pp. 614–617 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Jaffery, K.: Towards an e-infrastructure to support the provision and use of open data. In: Conference for eDemocracy and Open Government, pp. 259–275 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hey, T., Trefethen, A.E.: Cyberinfrastructure for e-science. Science 308(5723), 817–821 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chunpir, H., Moll, A.: Analysis of marine ecosystems: usability, visualization and community collaboration challenges. Procedia Manuf. 3, 3262–3265 (2015) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chunpir, H.I.: Enhancing User Support Process in Federated E-Science. University of Hamburg (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T., Badewi, A.A.: Using soft systems methodology (SSM) in understanding current user-support scenario in the climate science domain of cyber-infrastructures. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2014. LNCS, vol. 8519, pp. 495–506. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Freeman, P.A.: Is it possible to define cyberinfrastructure ? First Monday 6(12) (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Preece, J.: Citizen science: new research challenges for human – computer interaction. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 32(8), 585–612 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    UK e-Science Usability Task Force. Usability Research Challenges in e-Science (2009). Accessed 19 Sept 2016
  11. 11.
    Jirotka, M., Lee, C.P., Olson, G.M.: Supporting scientific collaboration: methods, tools and concepts. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 22(4), 667–715 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chunpir, H.I., Zaina, L.: Assisting users in open data infrastructures: a management perspective. In: 15th Internationa Conference WWW/Internet 2016, pp. 27–34 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen, J., et al.: Big data challenge: a data management perspective. Front. Comput. Sci. 7(2), 157–164 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rudolph, D., Thoring, A., Vogl, R.: Research data management: wishful thinking or reality? PIK – Prax. der Informationsverarbeitung und Kommun. 38(3–4), 113–120 (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., Zuiderwijk, A.: Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Inf. Syst. Manag. 29(4), 258–268 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Choenni, S., Meijer, R., Alibaks, R.S.: Socio-technical impediments of open data. Electron. J. e-Gov. 10(2), 156–172 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T., Williams, D.N.: Evolution of e-Research?: from infrastructure development to service orientation. In: DUXU 2015, Part III, LNCS, vol. 9188, pp. 25–35. Springer, Cham (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schulte, F., Chunpir, H.I., Voß, S.: Open data evolution in information systems research: considering cases of data-intensive transportation and grid systems. In: Proceedings of 5th International Conference, DUXU 2016, Held as Part of HCI International 2016, Part III, Toronto, Canada, 17–22 July 2016, pp. 193–201 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chunpir, H.I., Curri, E., Zaina, L., Ludwig, T.: Improving user interfaces for a request tracking system: best practical RT. In: Yamamoto, S. (ed.) HIMI 2016. LNCS, vol. 9735, pp. 391–401. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chunpir, H.I.: Prioritizing tasks using user-support-worker’s activity model (USWAM). In: Yamamoto, S. (ed.) HIMI 2016. LNCS, vol. 9735, pp. 379–390. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chunpir, H.I., Williams, D., Ludwig, T.: User experience (UX) of a big data infrastructure. In: Yamamoto, S. (ed.) HIMI 2017. LNCS, vol. 10274, pp. 467–474. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T., Badewi, A.: A snap-shot of user support services in Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF): a use case of climate cyber-infrastructures. In: Proceedings of the 5th Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE) Conference, July 2014Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chunpir, H.I., Rathmann, T., Ludwig, T.: The need for a tool to support users of e-science infrastructures in a virtual laboratory environment. Procedia Manuf. 3, 3375–3382 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chunpir, H.I., Badewi, A.A., Ludwig, T.: User support system in the complex environment. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2014. LNCS, vol. 8520, pp. 392–402. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harris, P.J., et al.: The virtual kidney: an eScience interface and Grid portal. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 367, 2141–2159 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mancini, E.P., et al.: Simulation in the cloud using handheld devices to cite this version: simulation in the cloud using handheld devices (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Venselaar, H., Ah, T., Kuipers, R.K.P., Hekkelman, M.L., Vriend, G.: Protein structure analysis of mutations causing inheritable diseases. An e-Science approach with life scientist friendly interfaces. BMC Bioinform. 11, 548 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T.: A software to capture mental models. In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds.) UAHCI 2017. LNCS, vol. 10279, pp. 393–409. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zuiderwijk A., Janssen, M.: A comparison of open data policies and their implementation in two dutch ministries. In: ACM 13th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (Dg.O 2012) (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Williams, D.N.: ESGF project overview (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T.: Reviewing the governance structure of end-user support in e-Science infrastructures. In: Informatik 2014 Proceedings on Mastering Big Data Complexity. Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), vol. 232 (2014)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chunpir, H.I., Ludwig, T., Curri, E.: Improving processes for user support in e-Science. In: IEEE 10th International Conference on e-Science (e-Science), vol. 2, pp. 87–90 (2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chunpir, H.I.: Prioritizing Tasks Using User-Support-Worker’s Activity Model (USWAM). In: Yamamoto, S. (ed.) HIMI 2016. LNCS, vol. 9735, pp. 379–390. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chunpir, H., Williams, D., Cinquini, L., Kindermann, S.: Third annual ESGF and ultrascale visualization climate data analysis tools face-to-face meeting report. Livermore, CA (2013)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yin, R.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edn. Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eisenhardt, K.: Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14(4), 532–550 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cinquini, L., et al.: The Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF): an open infrastructure for access to distributed geospatial data. In: 8th IEEE International Conference on E-Science, pp. 1–10 (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Williams, D.N., Bell, G., Cinquini, L., Fox, P., Harney, J., Goldstone, R.: ESGF: federated and integrated climate data from multiple sources. In: Hiller, W., Budich, R., Redler, R. (eds.) Earth System Modelling, vol. 6, pp. 61–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  39. 39.
    Choma, J., Zaina, L., Silva Da Silva, T.: Towards an approach matching CMD and DSR to improve the Academia-Industry software development partnership. In: 29th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, pp. 51–60 (2015)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Livari, J., Venable, J.: Action research and design science research seemingly similar but decisively dissimilar. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2009 European Conference on Information Systems (2009)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Finstad, K.: The system usability scale and non-native English speakers. English 1, 185–188 (2006)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Finstad, K.: Interacting with computers the usability metric for user experience. Interact. Comput. 22, 323–327 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Finstad, K.: Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: evidence against 5-point scales. J. Usability Stud. 5, 104–110 (2010)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Finstad, K.: Response to commentaries on ‘The usability metric for user experience’. Interact. Comput. 25, 327–330 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sauro, J.: Measuring Usability With The System Usability Scale (SUS) Measuring Usability (2011)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Papantoniou, B., et al.: The Glossary of Human Computer Interaction. Interaction Design Foundation. Accessed 22 Feb 2018

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversidade Federal de São CarlosSão CarlosBrazil
  2. 2.Faculty of InformaticsUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany
  3. 3.German Climate Computing Centre (DKRZ)HamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations