D. Large, G. Burnett, E. Crundall, Glyn Lawson, L. Skrypchuk
{"title":"Twist It, Touch It, Push It, Swipe It: Evaluating Secondary Input Devices for Use with an Automotive Touchscreen HMI","authors":"D. Large, G. Burnett, E. Crundall, Glyn Lawson, L. Skrypchuk","doi":"10.1145/3003715.3005459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Touchscreen Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) inherently demand some visual attention. By employing a secondary device, to work in unison with a touchscreen, some of this demand may be alleviated. In a medium-fidelity driving simulator, twenty-four drivers completed four typical in-vehicle tasks, utilising each of four devices -- touchscreen, rotary controller, steering wheel controls and touchpad (counterbalanced). Participants were then able to combine devices during a final 'free-choice' drive. Visual behaviour, driving/task performance and subjective ratings (workload, emotional response, preferences), indicated that in isolation the touchscreen was the most preferred/least demanding to use. In contrast, the touchpad was least preferred/most demanding, whereas the rotary controller and steering wheel controls were largely comparable across most measures. When provided with 'free-choice', the rotary controller and steering wheel controls presented as the most popular candidates, although this was task-dependent. Further work is required to explore these devices in greater depth and during extended periods of testing.","PeriodicalId":448266,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications","volume":"65 Suppl 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3003715.3005459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Touchscreen Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) inherently demand some visual attention. By employing a secondary device, to work in unison with a touchscreen, some of this demand may be alleviated. In a medium-fidelity driving simulator, twenty-four drivers completed four typical in-vehicle tasks, utilising each of four devices -- touchscreen, rotary controller, steering wheel controls and touchpad (counterbalanced). Participants were then able to combine devices during a final 'free-choice' drive. Visual behaviour, driving/task performance and subjective ratings (workload, emotional response, preferences), indicated that in isolation the touchscreen was the most preferred/least demanding to use. In contrast, the touchpad was least preferred/most demanding, whereas the rotary controller and steering wheel controls were largely comparable across most measures. When provided with 'free-choice', the rotary controller and steering wheel controls presented as the most popular candidates, although this was task-dependent. Further work is required to explore these devices in greater depth and during extended periods of testing.