Comparing evaluation methods for encumbrance and walking on interaction with touchscreen mobile devices

Alexander Ng, John Williamson, S. Brewster
{"title":"Comparing evaluation methods for encumbrance and walking on interaction with touchscreen mobile devices","authors":"Alexander Ng, John Williamson, S. Brewster","doi":"10.1145/2628363.2628382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, two walking evaluation methods were compared to evaluate the effects of encumbrance while the preferred walking speed (PWS) is controlled. Users frequently carry cumbersome objects (e.g. shopping bags) and use mobile devices at the same time which can cause interaction difficulties and erroneous input. The two methods used to control the PWS were: walking on a treadmill and walking around a predefined route on the ground while following a pacesetter. The results from our target acquisition experiment showed that for ground walking at 100% of PWS, accuracy dropped to 36% when carrying a bag in the dominant hand while accuracy reduced to 34% for holding a box under the dominant arm. We also discuss the advantages and limitations of each evaluation method when examining encumbrance and suggest treadmill walking is not the most suitable approach to use if walking speed is an important factor in future mobile studies.","PeriodicalId":74207,"journal":{"name":"MobileHCI : proceedings of the ... International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. MobileHCI (Conference)","volume":"17 1","pages":"23-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MobileHCI : proceedings of the ... International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. MobileHCI (Conference)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2628363.2628382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

In this paper, two walking evaluation methods were compared to evaluate the effects of encumbrance while the preferred walking speed (PWS) is controlled. Users frequently carry cumbersome objects (e.g. shopping bags) and use mobile devices at the same time which can cause interaction difficulties and erroneous input. The two methods used to control the PWS were: walking on a treadmill and walking around a predefined route on the ground while following a pacesetter. The results from our target acquisition experiment showed that for ground walking at 100% of PWS, accuracy dropped to 36% when carrying a bag in the dominant hand while accuracy reduced to 34% for holding a box under the dominant arm. We also discuss the advantages and limitations of each evaluation method when examining encumbrance and suggest treadmill walking is not the most suitable approach to use if walking speed is an important factor in future mobile studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较与触屏移动设备交互时的妨害和行走评价方法
在控制首选步行速度(PWS)的情况下,比较了两种步行评估方法对累赘的影响。用户经常携带笨重的物品(例如购物袋),同时使用移动设备,这会造成交互困难和错误输入。用于控制PWS的两种方法是:在跑步机上行走和在地面上沿着预定的路线行走,同时跟随一名领跑者。我们的目标获取实验结果表明,在100% PWS的情况下,在地面行走时,主手拿袋子的准确率降至36%,而主臂拿盒子的准确率降至34%。我们还讨论了在检查累赘时每种评估方法的优点和局限性,并建议如果步行速度是未来移动研究的重要因素,那么跑步机步行不是最合适的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Modeling Gliding-based Target Selection for Blind Touchscreen Users. MobileHCI '21: 23rd International Conference on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction, Extented Abstracts, Toulouse & Virtual Event, France, 27 September 2021 - 1 October 2021 Mobile Manifestations of Alertness: Connecting Biological Rhythms with Patterns of Smartphone App Use. Designing a multi-input modality architecture for universal accessibility Monox: extensible gesture notation for mobile devices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1