Lisa Anthony
Quincy Brown
ABSTRACT
As mobile devices like the iPad and iPhone become increasingly commonplace, touchscreen interactions are quickly overtaking other interaction methods in terms of frequency and experience for many users. However, most of these devices have been designed for the general, typical user. Trends indicate that children are using these devices (either their parents' or their own) for entertainment or learning activities. Previous work has found key differences in how children use touch and surface gesture interaction modalities vs. adults. In this paper, we specifically examine the impact of these differences in terms of automatically and reliably understanding what kids meant to do. We present a study of children and adults performing touch and surface gesture interaction tasks on mobile devices. We identify challenges related to (a) intentional and unintentional touches outside of onscreen targets and (b) recognition of drawn gestures, that both indicate a need to design tailored interaction for children to accommodate and overcome these challenges.
- Anthony, L. and Wobbrock, J.O. A lightweight multistroke recognizer for user interface prototypes. Proc. GI 2010, Canadian Information Processing Society (2010), 245--252. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Anthony, L. and Wobbrock, J.O. $N-protractor: a fast and accurate multistroke recognizer. Proc. GI 2012, (2012), 117--120. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Beery, K., Buktenica, N., and Beery, N.A. The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, 5th Edition. Modern Curriculum Press, New Jersey, 2004.Google Scholar
- Brown, Q. and Anthony, L. Toward comparing the touchscreen interaction patterns of kids and adults. ACM SIGCHI EIST Workshop, 4pp.Google Scholar
- Brown, Q., Bonsignore, E., Hatley, L., Druin, A., Walsh, G., Foss, E., Brewer, R., Hammer, J., and Golub, E. Clear Panels: a technique to design mobile application interactivity. Proc. DIS 2010, ACM (2010), 360--363. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chiong, C. and Shuler, C. Learning: Is there an app for that? Investigations of young children's usage and learning with mobile devices and apps. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, New York, NY, 2010.Google Scholar
- Donker, A. and Reitsma, P. Aiming and clicking in young children's use of the computer mouse. Computers in Human Behavior 23, 6 (2007), 2863--2874. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guyon, I., Schomaker, L., Plamondon, R., Liberman, M., and Janet, S. UNIPEN project of on-line data exchange and recognizer benchmarks. Proc. ICPR 1994, IEEE (1994), 29--33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hammond, T.A., Logsdon, D., Paulson, B., Johnston, J., Peschel, J., Wolin, A., and Taele, P. A sketch recognition system for recognizing free-hand course of action diagrams. Proc. IAAI 2010, AAAI Press (2010), 1781--1786.Google Scholar
- Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., and Rogers, Y. Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children's collaborative interactions? Proc. CSCL 2009, International Society of the Learning Sciences (2009), 335--344. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hinrichs, U. and Carpendale, S. Gestures in the wild. Proc. CHI 2011, ACM (2011), 3023--3032. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hourcade, J.P., Bederson, B.B., Druin, A., and Guimbretière, F. Differences in pointing task performance between preschool children and adults using mice. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 11, 4 (2004), 357--386. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hse, H.H. and Newton, A.R. Recognition and beautification of multi-stroke symbols in digital ink. Computers & Graphics 29, 4 (2005), 533--546. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Inkpen, K.M. Drag-and-drop versus point-and-click mouse interaction styles for children. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 8, 1 (2001), 1--33. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joiner, R., Messer, D., Light, P., and Littleton, K. It is best to point for young children: a comparison of children's pointing and dragging. Computers in Human Behavior 14, 3 (1998), 513--529.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jones, T. An empirical study of children's use of computer pointing devices. Journal of Educational Computing Research 7, 1 (1991), 61--76.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Keates, S. and Trewin, S. Effect of age and Parkinson's disease on cursor positioning using a mouse. Proc. ASSETS 2005, ACM (2005), 68--75. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Li, Y. Gesture search: a tool for fast mobile data access. Proc. UIST 2010, ACM (2010), 87--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- MacKenzie, I.S., Kauppinen, T., and Silfverberg, M. Accuracy measures for evaluating computer pointing devices. Proc. CHI 2001, ACM Press (2001), 9--16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Norris, C. and Soloway, E. Envisioning the handheld-centric classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research 30, 4 (2004), 281--294.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pitrelli, J.F. and Perrone, M.P. Confidence-scoring post-processing for off-line handwritten-character recognition verification. Proc. ICDAR 2003, IEEE (2003), 278--282. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Read, J.C., MacFarlane, S., and Casey, C. Pens behaving badly-usability of pens and graphics tablets for text entry with children. Adj. Proc. UIST 2002, ACM Press (2002), 21--Google Scholar
- Rick, J., Harris, A., Marshall, P., Fleck, R., Yuill, N., and Rogers, Y. Children designing together on a multi-touch tabletop: An analysis of spatial orientation and user interactions. Proc. IDC 2009, ACM (2009), 106--114. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rubine, D. Specifying gestures by example. SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics 25, 4 (1991), 329--337. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryall, K., Morris, M.R., Everitt, K., Forlines, C., and Shen, C. Experiences with and observations of direct-touch tabletops. Proc. Tabletop 2006, IEEE (2006), 8pp. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shin, N., Norris, C., and Soloway, E. Effects of handheld games on students learning in mathematics. Proc. ICLS 2006, International Society of the Learning Sciences (2006), 702--708. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shuler, C. Pockets of Potential: Using Mobile Technologies to Promote Children's Learning. Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, New York, NY, 2009.Google Scholar
- Vatavu, R.-D., Vogel, D., Casiez, G., and Grisoni, L. Estimating the perceived difficulty of pen gestures. Proc. INTERACT 2011, Springer (2011), 89--106. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vogel, D. and Balakrishnan, R. Direct pen interaction with a conventional graphical user interface. Human-Computer Interaction 25, 4 (2010), 324--388.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Willems, D., Niels, R., Van Gerven, M., and Vuurpijl, L. Iconic and multi-stroke gesture recognition. Pattern Recognition 42, 12 (2009), 3303--3312. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wobbrock, J.O., Aung, H.H., Rothrock, B., and Myers, B.A. Maximizing the guessability of symbolic input. Ext. Abstracts CHI 2005, ACM (2005), 1869--1872. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wobbrock, J.O., Wilson, A.D., and Li, Y. Gestures without libraries, toolkits or training: a $1 recognizer for user interface prototypes. Proc. UIST 2007, ACM (2007), 159--168. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Interaction and recognition challenges in interpreting children's touch and gesture input on mobile devices
Recommendations
Examining the need for visual feedback during gesture interaction on mobile touchscreen devices for kids
IDC '13: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and ChildrenSurface gesture interaction styles used on modern mobile touchscreen devices are often dependent on the platform and application. Some applications show a visual trace of gesture input as it is made by the user, whereas others do not. Little work has ...
Using gamification to motivate children to complete empirical studies in lab environments
IDC '13: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and ChildrenIn this paper, we describe the challenges we encountered and solutions we developed while collecting mobile touch and gesture interaction data in laboratory conditions from children ages 5 to 7 years old. We identify several challenges of conducting ...
Designing smarter touch-based interfaces for educational contexts
In next-generation classrooms and educational environments, interactive technologies such as surface computing, natural gesture interfaces, and mobile devices will enable new means of motivating and engaging students in active learning. Our foundational ...
Comments