I. Scott MacKenzie
Tatu Kauppinen
ABSTRACT
In view of the difficulties in evaluating computer pointing devices across different tasks within dynamic and complex systems, new performance measures are needed. This paper proposes seven new accuracy measures to elicit (sometimes subtle) differences among devices in precision pointing tasks. The measures are target re-entry, task axis crossing, movement direction change, orthogonal direction change, movement variability, movement error, and movement offset. Unlike movement time, error rate, and throughput, which are based on a single measurement per trial, the new measures capture aspects of movement behaviour during a trial. The theoretical basis and computational techniques for the measures are described, with examples given. An evaluation with four pointing devices was conducted to validate the measures. A causal relationship to pointing device efficiency (viz. throughput) was found, as was an ability to discriminate among devices in situations where differences did not otherwise appear. Implications for pointing device research are discussed.
- 1.Accot, J., and Zhai, S. Beyond Fitts' law: Models for trajectory-based HCI tasks, In Proceedings of the CHI '97 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, 1997, pp. 295-302. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 2.Akamatsu, M., MacKenzie, I. S., and Hasbrouq, T. A comparison of tactile, auditory, and visual feedback in a pointing task using a mouse-type device, Ergonomics 38 (1995), 816-827.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 3.Bailey, R. W. Human performance engineering: Designing high quality, professional user interfaces for computer products, applications, and systems, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 4.Card, S. K., English, W. K., and Burr, B. J. Evaluation of mouse, rate-controlled isometric joystick, step keys, and text keys for text selection on a CRT, Ergonomics 21 (1978), 601-613.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 5.Douglas, S. A., Kirkpatrick, A. E., and MacKenzie, I. S. Testing pointing device performance and user assessment with the ISO 9241, Part 9 standard, In Proceedings of the CHI '99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, 1999, pp. 215-222. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 6.English, W. K., Engelbart, D. C., and Berman, M. L. Display selection techniques for text manipulation, IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics HFE-8 (1967), 5-15.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 7.Epps, B. W. Comparison of six cursor control devices based on Fitts' law models, In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society, 1986, pp. 327-331.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 8.ISO ISO/TC 159/SC4/WG3 N147: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) - Part 9 - Requirements for non-keyboard input devices, International Organisation for Standardisation, May 25, 1998.Google Scholar
- 9.Karat, J., McDonald, J. E., and Anderson, M. A comparison of selection techniques: touch panel, mouse, and keyboard, In Human-Computer Interaction--INTERACT '84. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1985, pp. 189-193.Google Scholar
- 10.MacKenzie, I. S. Fitts' law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction, Human-Computer Interaction 7 (1992), 91-139.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 11.MacKenzie, I. S., Sellen, A., and Buxton, W. A comparison of input devices in elemental pointing and dragging tasks, In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '91. New York: ACM, 1991, pp. 161-166. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 12.Mithal, A. K., and Douglas, S. A. Differences in movement microstructure of the mouse and the fingercontrolled isometric joystick, In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '96. New York: ACM, 1996, pp. 300-307. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 13.Murata, A. An experimental evaluation of mouse, joystick, joycard, lightpen, trackball, and touchscreen for pointing: Basic study on human interface design, In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier, 1991, 123-127.Google Scholar
- 14.Stevens, J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, 3rd ed. (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Accuracy measures for evaluating computer pointing devices
Recommendations
Pupil vs. Eyelid: Evaluating the Accuracy of Blink Detection in Pupil-based Eye Tracking Devices
AbstractSpontaneous eye blinks as a means to tap into human cognitive and affective processes have been demonstrated to offer valuable insight in various fields of application, such as human-computer-interaction and driver drowsiness detection. ...
Accuracy of interpreting pointing gestures in egocentric view
UbiComp '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous ComputingCommunicating spatial information by pointing is ubiquitous in human interactions. With the growing use of head-mounted cameras for collaborative purposes, it is important to assess how accurately viewers of the resulting egocentric videos can interpret ...
MAGIC pointing for eyewear computers
ISWC '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable ComputersIn this paper, we propose a combination of head and eye movements for touchlessly controlling the "mouse pointer" on eyewear devices, exploiting the speed of eye pointing and accuracy of head pointing. The method is a wearable computer-targeted ...
Comments