Gonzalo A. Ramos
Ravin Balakrishnan
ABSTRACT
Selections and actions in GUI's are often separated -- i.e. an action or command typically follows a selection. This sequence imposes a lower bound on the interaction time that is equal to or greater than the sum of its parts. In this paper, we introduce pressure marks -- pen strokes where the variations in pressure make it possible to indicate both a selection and an action simultaneously. We propose a series of design guidelines from which we develop a set of four basictypes of pressure marks. We first assess the viability of this set through an exploratory study that looks at the way users draw straight and lasso pressure marks of different sizes and orientations. We then present the results of a quantitative experiment that shows that users perform faster selection-action interactions with pressure marks than with a combination of lassos and pigtails. Based on these results, we present and discuss a number of interaction designs that incorporate pressure marks.
- Agarawala, A. and Balakrishnan, R. (2006). Keepin' It Real: Pushing the Desktop Metaphor with Physics, Piles and the Pen. CHI, 1283--1292. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Baudisch, P., Xie, X., Wang, C. and Ma, W.-Y. (2004). Collapse-to-zoom: viewing web pages on small screen devices by interactively removing irrelevant content. UIST, 91--94. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Boothe, R.G. (2001) Perception of the Visual Environment. Springer.Google Scholar
- Buxton, W. and Myers, B. (1986). A study in two-handed input. CHI, 321--326. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elliott, D., Helsen, W.F. and Chua, R. (2001). A century later: Woodworth's, 1899. Two-component model of goal-directed aiming. Psych. Bulletin (127). 342--357.Google Scholar
- Fitzmaurice, G., Balakrishnan, R. and Kurtenbach, G. (1999). An exploration into supporting artwork orientation in the user interface. CHI, 167--174. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guimbretière, F., Martin, A. and Winograd, T. (2005). Benefits of merging command selection and direct manipulation. TOCHI, 12 (3). 460--476. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hinckley, K., Baudisch, P., Ramos, G. and Guimbretiere, F. (2005). Design and analysis of delimiters for selection-action pen gesture phrases in scriboli. CHI, 451--460. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hinckley, K., Guimbretiere, F., Agrawala, M., Apitz, G. and Chen, N. (2006). Phrasing techniques for multi-stroke selection gestures. GI, 147--154. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jacob, R., Sibert, L., McFarlane, D. and Mullen, M. (1994). Integrality and separability of input devices. TOCHI, 1 (1). 3--26. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kara, L.B. and Stahovich, T.F. (2004). Hierarchical parsing and recognition of hand-sketched diagrams. UIST, 13--22. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kurtenbach, G. and Buxton, W. (1993). The limits of expert performance using hierarchical marking menus. CHI, 35--42.Google Scholar
- Latulipe, C., Kaplan, C.S. and Clarke, C.L.A. (2005). Bimanual and unimanual image alignment: an evaluation of mousebased techniques. UIST, 123--131. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Li, Y., Hinckley, K., Guan, Z. and Landay, J.A. (2005). Experimental analysis of mode switching techniques in pen-based user interfaces. CHI, 461--470. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mizobuchi, S. and Yasumura, M. (2004). Tapping vs. circling selections on pen-based devices: evidence for different performance-shaping factors. CHI, 607--614. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ramos, G. and Balakrishnan, R. (2005). Zliding: fluid zooming and sliding for high precision parameter manipulation. UIST, 143--152. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ramos, G., Boulos, M. and Balakrishnan, R. (2004). Pressure Widgets. CHI, 487--494. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rubine, D. (1991). Specifying gestures by example. SIGGRAPH, 329--337. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Saund, E. and Lank, E. (2003). Stylus input and editing without prior selection of mode. UIST, 213--216. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shen, C., Vernier, F.D., Forlines, C. and Ringel, M. (2004). DiamondSpin: an extensible toolkit for around-the-table interaction. CHI, 167--174. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Srinivasan, M. and Chen, J. (1993). Human performance in controlling normal forces of contact with rigid objects. ASME, 49. 119--125.Google Scholar
- Wu, M. and Balakrishnan, R. (2003). Multi-finger and whole hand gestural interaction techniques for multi-user tabletop displays. UIST, 193--202. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zeleznik, R., Miller, T. and Forsberg, A. (2001). Pop through mouse button interactions. UIST, 195--196. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhao, S. and Balakrishnan, R. (2004). Simple vs. compound mark hierarchical marking menus. UIST, 33--42. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Pressure marks
Recommendations
Pressure widgets
CHI '04: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsCurrent user interface widgets typically assume that the input device can only provide x-y position and binary button press information. Other inputs such as the continuous pressure data provided by styluses on tablets are rarely used. We explore the ...
Touchless gestural interaction with small displays: a case study
CHItaly '13: Proceedings of the Biannual Conference of the Italian Chapter of SIGCHITouchless gestural interaction enables users to interact with digital devices using body movements and gestures, and without the burden of a physical contact with technology (e.g., data gloves, body markers, or remote controllers). Most gesture-based ...
Biting, Whirling, Crawling - Children's Embodied Interaction with Walk-through Displays
INTERACT '09: Proceedings of the 12th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Part IUnderstanding of embodied interaction in the context of walk-through displays and designing for it is very limited. This study examined children's intuitive embodied interaction with a large, semi-visible, projective walk-through display and space ...
Comments