Task-Oriented Function Configuration and Evaluation of a Smart Beauty Mirror for Sustainable Design Decision-Making: An Integrated HTA–Kano– RANCOM–FCE Framework
This study proposes an integrated HTA–Kano–RANCOM–FCE framework to optimize sustainable design decisions for smart beauty mirrors by aligning functional configurations with specific task stages and differentiating between permanent physical features and flexible digital services, thereby reducing redundancy while enhancing user adaptability.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In the modern home, the boundary between a physical object and a digital service is becoming increasingly porous. We live with devices that are not just tools but gateways to information, where a mirror might reflect a face while simultaneously analyzing skin health or suggesting a makeup look. This convergence creates a new design challenge: how to decide which features belong on the physical device and which belong in the cloud or on a smartphone app. If a physical product tries to do everything at once, it can become cluttered, difficult to update, and ultimately less useful as needs change over time. The goal of sustainable design in this context is not just about using less material, but about creating products that remain flexible and relevant for years, avoiding the trap of hard-coding functions that might become obsolete or unnecessary. To solve this, designers must understand the specific moments when a user needs help, distinguishing between a constant need for light and a temporary need for a tutorial.
Researchers at the Shaanxi University of Science and Technology tackled this problem by looking closely at the daily routine of applying makeup. They chose the morning commute as their laboratory, a scenario where speed and precision are essential. Instead of listing every possible feature a smart mirror could have, the team broke the act of applying makeup down into eight distinct stages, from the initial skincare preparation to the final touch of lipstick. They observed real users, interviewed them about their struggles, and surveyed a large group to understand exactly what went wrong at each step. They found that the needs of a person applying foundation are fundamentally different from those of someone doing detailed eye makeup. One stage requires broad, even lighting, while another demands a magnified view and a steady hand.
To make sense of these varied needs, the team used a structured approach to weigh every possible function. They asked users to imagine having a specific feature, such as an automatic skin analysis tool, and then asked how they would feel if that feature were missing. This helped them categorize each need: some were absolute necessities, others were nice-to-haves that would delight the user, and some were simply irrelevant to the task at hand. They then ranked these needs for every single stage of the makeup process. To ensure their ranking method was efficient and accurate, they tested it against other established decision-making tools. They found that their chosen method allowed users to rank nine different requirements in less than four minutes on average, a significant improvement over other techniques that took much longer, while still producing results that matched independent user judgments almost perfectly.
The most significant finding was that a single, static list of features does not work for a dynamic process like makeup. The researchers discovered that functions like intelligent lighting and the ability to see fine details were needed constantly across almost every stage, making them ideal candidates for the physical mirror itself. In contrast, functions like learning new makeup techniques, tracking long-term skin health, or trying on virtual looks were highly specific to certain moments or required ongoing updates. These were better suited for a companion app on a phone. By separating the stable, immediate needs from the flexible, information-heavy ones, the team proposed a design where the mirror handles the core, real-time tasks, while the app manages the rest. This division prevents the physical mirror from becoming a cluttered, outdated box of buttons and keeps the system adaptable for future changes.
The team then built a complete design concept based on these rules. The physical mirror features a simple, adjustable stand and a removable magnifying lens that can be moved to focus on specific areas like the eyes or lips. Its interface is clean, showing only the tools relevant to the current step of the makeup routine, rather than a confusing menu of all possible options. The companion app handles the data, storing skin analysis records and offering tutorials. When they tested this concept with a new group of users, the design received a high score for how well it matched the flow of the makeup process. The users felt that the separation of duties between the mirror and the app made sense, and that the design avoided the common problem of having too many functions that never get used.
This work suggests that the future of smart home devices lies not in adding more features to a single object, but in knowing exactly which features belong where. By treating a product as a series of connected moments rather than a single static tool, designers can create systems that are both powerful and enduring. The study does not claim to have solved every problem in product design, nor does it prove that this specific mirror will last longer in the real world. However, it provides a clear, tested method for deciding how to split functions between hardware and software, ensuring that the physical device remains simple and the digital service remains flexible. In doing so, it offers a path toward products that grow with the user rather than becoming obsolete.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.