skip to main content
10.1145/3290605.3300467acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

Clairbuoyance: Improving Directional Perception for Swimmers

Published:02 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

While we usually have no trouble with orientation, our sense of direction frequently fails in the absence of a frame of reference. Open-water swimmers raise their heads to look for a reference point, since disorientation might result in exhaustion or even drowning. In this paper, we report on Clairbuoyance - a system that provides feedback about the swimmer's orientation through lights mounted on swimming goggles. We conducted an experiment with two versions of Clairbuoyance: Discrete signals relative to a chosen direction, and continuous signals providing a sense of absolute direction. Participants swam to a series of targets. Proficient swimmers preferred the discrete mode; novice users the continuous one. We determined that both versions of Clairbuoyance enabled reaching the target faster than without the help of the system, although the discrete mode increased error. Based on the results, we contribute insights for designing directional guidance feedback for swimmers.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

paper237.mp4

mp4

47.3 MB

paper237p.mp4

mp4

4.9 MB

References

  1. Marc Bächlin, Kilian Förster, and Gerhard Tröster. 2009. SwimMaster: A Wearable Assistant for Swimmer. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 215--224. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Stephen Brewster and Lorna M. Brown. 2004. Tactons: Structured Tactile Messages for Non-visual Information Display. In Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Australasian User Interface - Volume 28 (AUIC '04). Australian Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 15--23. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=976310.976313 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. John Brooke et al. 1996. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 189, 194 (1996), 4--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jennifer L. Burke, Matthew S. Prewett, Ashley A. Gray, Liuquin Yang, Frederick R. B. Stilson, Michael D. Coovert, Linda R. Elliot, and Elizabeth Redden. 2006. Comparing the Effects of Visual-auditory and Visual-tactile Feedback on User Performance: A Meta-analysis. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '06). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 108--117. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Andrew J Callaway, Jon E Cobb, and Ian Jones. 2009. A Comparison of Video and Accelerometer Based Approaches Applied to Performance Monitoring in Swimming. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 4, 1 (2009), 139--153. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1260/1747--9541.4.1.139Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Marta G. Carcedo, Soon Hau Chua, Simon Perrault, Pawel Wozniak, Raj Joshi, Mohammad Obaid, Morten Fjeld, and Shengdong Zhao. 2016. HaptiColor: Interpolating Color Information As Haptic Feedback to Assist the Colorblind. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3572--3583. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Woohyeok Choi, Jeungmin Oh, Darren Edge, Joohyun Kim, and Uichin Lee. 2016. SwimTrain: Exploring Exergame Design for Group Fitness Swimming. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1692--1704. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Enrico Costanza, Samuel A. Inverso, Elan Pavlov, Rebecca Allen, and Pattie Maes. 2006. Eye-q: Eyeglass Peripheral Display for Subtle Intimate Notifications. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Humancomputer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '06). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 211--218. CHI 2019, May 4--9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland UK Kiss et al. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Neil P. Davey, Megan E. Anderson, and Daniel A. James. 2005. An accelerometer-based system for elite athlete swimming performance analysis., 5649 - 5649 - 7 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Neil P. Davey, Megan E. Anderson, and Daniel A. James. 2008. Validation trial of an accelerometer-based sensor platform for swimming. Sports Technology 1, 4--5 (2008), 202--207. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/19346182.2008.9648474Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Jan Etherington. 2015. Why open water swimming is the trend of 2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/ 11325401/Why-open-water-swimming-is-the-trend-of-2015.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Aryan Firouzian, Yukitoshi Kashimoto, Zeeshan Asghar, Niina Keranen, Goshiro Yamamoto, and Petri Pulli. 2017. Twinkle Megane: Near-Eye LED Indicators on Glasses for Simple and Smart Navigation in Daily Life. In eHealth 360°, Kostas Giokas, Laszlo Bokor, and Frank Hopfgartner (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 17--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Kilian Förster, Marc Bächlin, and Gerhard Tröster. 2009. Noninterrupting User Interfaces for Electronic Body-worn Swim Devices. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 38, 4 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Rabee M. Hagema, Tim Haelsig, Steven G. O'Keefe, Andy Stamm, Thomas Fickenscher, and David V. Thiel. 2013. Second Generation Swimming Feedback Device Using a Wearable Data Processing System based on Underwater Visible Light Communication. Procedia Engineering 60 (2013), 34 -- 39. 6th Asia-Pacific Congress on Sports Technology (APCST).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Sandra G Hart and Lowell E Staveland. 1988. Development of NASATLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in psychology. Vol. 52. Elsevier, 139--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Francisco Kiss, Robin Boldt, Bastian Pfleging, and Stefan Schneegass. 2018. Navigation Systems for Motorcyclists: Exploring Wearable Tactile Feedback for Route Guidance in the Real World. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 617, 7 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Kristina Knaving, Pawel Wozniak, Morten Fjeld, and Staffan Björk. 2015. Flow is Not Enough: Understanding the Needs of Advanced Amateur Runners to Design Motivation Technology. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2013--2022. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Ming-Wei Lin, Yun-Maw Cheng, Wai Yu, and Frode Eika Sandnes. 2008. Investigation into the Feasibility of Using Tactons to Provide Navigation Cues in Pedestrian Situations. In Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Designing for Habitus and Habitat (OZCHI '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 299--302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Morgane Mangin, Aurelien Valade, Antony Costes, Anthony Bouillod, Pascal Acco, and Georges Soto-Romero. 2015. An Instrumented Glove for Swimming Performance Monitoring. 53--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Joe Marshall. 2013. Smartphone Sensing for Distributed Swim Stroke Coaching and Research. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing Adjunct Publication (UbiComp '13 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1413--1416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Andrii Matviienko, Andreas Löcken, Abdallah El Ali, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2016. NaviLight: Investigating Ambient Light Displays for Turn-by-turn Navigation in Cars. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 283-- 294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Florian Mueller, Rohit A. Khot, Alan D. Chatham, Sebastiaan Pijnappel, Cagdas "Chad" Toprak, and Joe Marshall. 2013. HCI with Sports. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2509--2512. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Jaroslav Novak. 1983. Swimming direction and visual control. Biomechanics and medicine in swimming IV (International Series on Sport Sciences) (1983), 345--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Marco Parvis, Sabrina Grassini, Emma Angelini, and Pietro Scattareggia. 2016. Swimming symmetry assessment via multiple inertial measurements. In 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA). 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Martin Pielot, Benjamin Poppinga, and Susanne Boll. 2010. PocketNavigator: Vibro-tactile Waypoint Navigation for Everyday Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 423--426. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Martin Pielot, Benjamin Poppinga, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2011. A Tactile Compass for Eyes-Free Pedestrian Navigation. In Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2011, Pedro Campos, Nicholas Graham, Joaquim Jorge, Nuno Nunes, Philippe Palanque, and Marco Winckler (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 640--656. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Benjamin Poppinga, Niels Henze, Jutta Fortmann, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2012. AmbiGlasses - Information in the Periphery of the Visual Field. (01 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Maria Psychountaki and Yannis Zervas. 2000. Competitive Worries, Sport Confidence, and Performance Ratings for Young Swimmers. Perceptual and Motor Skills 91, 1 (2000), 87--94. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2000.91.1.87 PMID: 11011876.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Jan L Souman, Ilja Frissen, Manish N Sreenivasa, and Marc O Ernst. 2009. Walking straight into circles. Current biology 19, 18 (2009), 1538--1542.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Hong Z. Tan and Alex Pentland. 1997. Tactual displays for wearable computing. Personal Technologies 1, 4 (01 Dec 1997), 225--230.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Jakob Tholander and Stina Nylander. 2015. Snot, sweat, pain, mud, and snow: Performance and experience in the use of sports watches. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2913--2922. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Hung-Yu Tseng, Rong-Hao Liang, Liwei Chan, and Bing-Yu Chen. 2015. LEaD: Utilizing Light Movement As Peripheral Visual Guidance for Scooter Navigation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 323--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Hung-Yu Tseng, Rong-Hao Liang, Liwei Chan, and Bing-Yu Chen. 2015. Using Point-light Movement As Peripheral Visual Guidance for Scooter Navigation. In Proceedings of the 6th Augmented Human International Conference (AH '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Koji Tsukada and Michiaki Yasumura. 2004. Activebelt: Belt-type wearable tactile display for directional navigation. In International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. Springer, 384--399.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Tom van Veen, Juffrizal Karjanto, and Jacques Terken. 2017. Situation Awareness in Automated Vehicles Through Proximal Peripheral Light Signals. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 287--292. Clairbuoyance CHI 2019, May 4--9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland UK Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Pawel Wozniak, Kristina Knaving, Staffan Björk, and Morten Fjeld. 2015. RUFUS: Remote Supporter Feedback for Long-Distance Runners. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 115--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Clairbuoyance: Improving Directional Perception for Swimmers

    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 '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2019
      9077 pages
      ISBN:9781450359702
      DOI:10.1145/3290605

      Copyright © 2019 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 the author(s) 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: 2 May 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '19 Paper Acceptance Rate703of2,958submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format