skip to main content
10.1145/1357054.1357299acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Evaluating tactile feedback and direct vs. indirect stylus input in pointing and crossing selection tasks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 April 2008Publication History

ABSTRACT

We present a pair of experiments that explore the effects of tactile-feedback and direct vs. indirect pen input on pointing and crossing selection tasks. While previous work has demonstrated the validity of crossing as a useful selection mechanism for pen-based computing, those experiments were conducted using an indirect input device -- one in which the pen-input and display were separated. We investigate users' performance with pointing and crossing interfaces controlled via not only an indirect input device, but also a direct input device -- one in which the pen-input and display are co-located. Results show that direct input significantly outperforms indirect input for crossing selection, but the two modalities are essentially equivalent in pointing selection. A small amount of tactile feedback is shown to be beneficial for both pointing and crossing selection, most noticeably in crossing tasks when using direct input where visual feedback is often occluded by a hand or stylus.

References

  1. Accot, J. and Zhai, S. (2002). More than dotting the i's - foundations for crossing-based interfaces. ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. p. 73--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Akamatsu, M. and MacKenzie, S. (1996). Movement characteristics using a mouse with tactile and force feedback. International Journal Human-Computer Studies, 45(4). p. 483--493. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Akamatsu, M., MacKenzie, S., and Hasbrouc, T. (1995). A comparison of tactile, auditory, and visual feedback in a pointing task using a mouse-type device. Ergonomics, 38(815--827).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Apitz, G. and Guimbretière, F. (2004). CrossY: a crossing-based drawing application. ACM UIST Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. p. 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Baudisch, P. (1998). Don't click, paint! Using toggle maps to manipulate sets of toggle switches. ACM UIST Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. p. 65--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Blaine, T. and Perkis, T. (2000). Jam-O-Drum: A study in interaction design. ACM DIS Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. p. 165--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Everitt, K., Forlines, C., Ryall, K., and Shen, C. (2005). Observations of a shared tabletop user study. Interactive poster in ACM CSCW Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Fitts, P.M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47. p. 381--391.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Fukumoto, M. and Sugimura, T. (2001). Active click tactile feedback for touch panels. Extended Abstracts of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. p. 121--122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Lee, J., Dietz, P., Leigh, D., Yerazunis, W., and Hudson, S. (2004). Haptic pen: a tactile feedback stylus for touch screens. ACM UIST Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. p. 291--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. MacKenzie, S. (1992). Fitts' law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction, 7. p. 91--139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Oakley, I., Adams, A., Brewster, S., and Gray, P. (2002). Guidelines for the design of haptic widgets. Proceedings of the British HCI Conference. p. 195--212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Oakley, I., Brewster, S., and Gray, P. (2001). Solving multi-target haptic problems in menu interaction. Extended Abstracts of ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. p. 357--358. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Poupyrev, I. and Maruyama, S. (2003). Tactile inter-faces for small touch screens. ACM UIST Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. p. 217--220. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Poupyrev, I., Okabe, M., and Maruyama, S. (2004). Haptic feedback for pen computing: directions and strategies. Extended Abstracts of ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. p. 1309--1312. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ren, X. and Moriya, S. (2000). Improving selection performance on pen-based systems: a study of pen-based interaction for selection tasks. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(3). p. 384--416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Rosenbaum, D. (1991). Human motor control. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Schneiderman, B. (1991). Touch screens now offer compelling uses, IEEE Software, 8(2). p. 93--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Zhai, S. (2004). Characterizing computer input with Fitts' law parameters - The information and non-information aspects of pointing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(6). p. 791--809. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Zhai, S., Kong, J., and Ren, X. (2004). Speed-accuracy trade-off in Fitts' law tasks - On the equivalency of actual and nominal pointing precision. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(6). p. 823--856. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Evaluating tactile feedback and direct vs. indirect stylus input in pointing and crossing selection tasks

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '08: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2008
      1870 pages
      ISBN:9781605580111
      DOI:10.1145/1357054

      Copyright © 2008 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 6 April 2008

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '08 Paper Acceptance Rate157of714submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader