车载触摸屏的触控、压力滚动和触觉反馈评估

Alexander Ng, S. Brewster
{"title":"车载触摸屏的触控、压力滚动和触觉反馈评估","authors":"Alexander Ng, S. Brewster","doi":"10.1145/3122986.3122997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An in-car study was conducted to examine different input techniques for list-based scrolling tasks and the effectiveness of haptic feedback for in-car touchscreens. The use of physical switchgear on centre consoles is decreasing which allows designers to develop new ways to interact with in-car applications. However, these new methods need to be evaluated to ensure they are usable. Therefore, three input techniques were tested: direct scrolling, pressure-based scrolling and scrolling using onscreen buttons on a touchscreen. The results showed that direct scrolling was less accurate than using onscreen buttons and pressure input, but took almost half the time when compared to the onscreen buttons and was almost three times quicker than pressure input. Vibrotactile feedback did not improve input performance but was preferred by the users. Understanding the speed vs. accuracy trade-off between these input techniques will allow better decisions when designing safer in-car interfaces for scrolling applications.","PeriodicalId":143620,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Evaluation of Touch and Pressure-Based Scrolling and Haptic Feedback for In-Car Touchscreens\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Ng, S. Brewster\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3122986.3122997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An in-car study was conducted to examine different input techniques for list-based scrolling tasks and the effectiveness of haptic feedback for in-car touchscreens. The use of physical switchgear on centre consoles is decreasing which allows designers to develop new ways to interact with in-car applications. However, these new methods need to be evaluated to ensure they are usable. Therefore, three input techniques were tested: direct scrolling, pressure-based scrolling and scrolling using onscreen buttons on a touchscreen. The results showed that direct scrolling was less accurate than using onscreen buttons and pressure input, but took almost half the time when compared to the onscreen buttons and was almost three times quicker than pressure input. Vibrotactile feedback did not improve input performance but was preferred by the users. Understanding the speed vs. accuracy trade-off between these input techniques will allow better decisions when designing safer in-car interfaces for scrolling applications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":143620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3122986.3122997\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3122986.3122997","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

我们进行了一项车内研究,以检验基于列表的滚动任务的不同输入技术,以及车内触摸屏触觉反馈的有效性。中控台上物理开关设备的使用正在减少,这使得设计人员能够开发出与车内应用程序交互的新方法。然而,需要对这些新方法进行评估,以确保它们是可用的。因此,我们测试了三种输入技术:直接滚动、基于压力的滚动和使用触摸屏上的屏幕按钮滚动。结果显示,直接滚动比使用屏幕按钮和压力输入更不准确,但与屏幕按钮相比,它花费的时间几乎是屏幕按钮的一半,几乎是压力输入的三倍。振动触觉反馈并没有提高输入性能,但更受用户青睐。了解这些输入技术之间的速度和准确性权衡,将有助于在为滚动应用程序设计更安全的车载界面时做出更好的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
An Evaluation of Touch and Pressure-Based Scrolling and Haptic Feedback for In-Car Touchscreens
An in-car study was conducted to examine different input techniques for list-based scrolling tasks and the effectiveness of haptic feedback for in-car touchscreens. The use of physical switchgear on centre consoles is decreasing which allows designers to develop new ways to interact with in-car applications. However, these new methods need to be evaluated to ensure they are usable. Therefore, three input techniques were tested: direct scrolling, pressure-based scrolling and scrolling using onscreen buttons on a touchscreen. The results showed that direct scrolling was less accurate than using onscreen buttons and pressure input, but took almost half the time when compared to the onscreen buttons and was almost three times quicker than pressure input. Vibrotactile feedback did not improve input performance but was preferred by the users. Understanding the speed vs. accuracy trade-off between these input techniques will allow better decisions when designing safer in-car interfaces for scrolling applications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pedestrian Interaction with Vehicles: Roles of Explicit and Implicit Communication Eyes on a Car: an Interface Design for Communication between an Autonomous Car and a Pedestrian Differentiating Cognitive Load Using a Modified Version of AttenD What Did I Sniff?: Mapping Scents Onto Driving-Related Messages Situation Awareness in Automated Vehicles through Proximal Peripheral Light Signals
×
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