Kasper Hornbæk
Morten Hertzum
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Fisheye menus have become a prominent example of fisheye interfaces, yet contain several nonfisheye elements and have not been systematically evaluated. This study investigates whether fisheye menus are useful, and tries to untangle the impact on usability of the following properties of fisheye menus: use of distortion, index of letters for coarse navigation, and the focus-lock mode for accurate movement. Twelve participants took part in an experiment comparing fisheye menus with three alternative menu designs across known-item and browsing tasks, as well as across alphabetical and categorical menu structures. The results show that for finding known items, conventional hierarchical menus are the most accurate and by far the fastest. In addition, participants rate the hierarchical menu as more satisfying than fisheye and multifocus menus, but do not consistently prefer any one menu. For browsing tasks, the menus neither differ with respect to accuracy nor selection time. Eye-movement data show that participants make little use of nonfocus regions of the fisheye menu, though these are a defining feature of fisheye interfaces. Nonfocus regions are used more with the multifocus menu, which enlarges important menu items in these regions. With the hierarchical menu, participants make shorter fixations and have shorter scanpaths, suggesting lower requirements for mental activity and visual search. We conclude by discussing why fisheye menus are inferior to the hierarchical menu and how both may be improved.
- Aaltonen, A., Hyrskykari, A., and Räihä, K. J. 1998. 101 spots, or how do users read menus? In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 132--139. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ahlström, D. 2005. Modeling and improving selection in cascading pull-down menus using Fitts' law, the Stering law and force fields. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 61--70. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Baudisch, P., Good, N., Belotti, V., and Schradley, P. 2002. Keeping things in context: A comparative evaluation of focus plus context screens, overviews, and zooming. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 259--266. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Baudisch, P., Lee, B., and Hanna, L. 2004. Fishnet, a fisheye web browser with search term popouts: A comparative evaluation with overview and linear view. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces. ACM, New York, 133--140. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bederson, B. 2000. Fisheye menus. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, New York, 217--226. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bederson, B., Clamage, A., Czerwinski, M. P., and Robertson, G. G. 2004. DateLens: A fisheye calendar for PDAs. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 11, 1, 90--119. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carpendale, M. S. T. and Montagnese, C. 2001. A framework for unifying presentation space. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, New York, 61--70. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carpendale, S., Light, J., and Pattison, E. 2004. Achieving higher magnification in context. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, New York, 71--80. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Douglas, S. A., Kirkpatrick, A. E., and MacKenzie, I. S. 1999. Testing pointing device performance and user assessment with the ISO 9241, part 9 standard. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 215--222. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fitts, P. M. 1954. The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J. Exper. Psychol. 47, 6, 381--391.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fleiss, J. 1981. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Furnas, G. W. 1999/1981. The fisheye view: A new look at structured files. Rep. No. Bell Laboratories Tech. Memo. #81-11221-9. Reprinted in S. K. Card, J. D. MackInlay, and B. Shneiderman (1999) Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 312--330. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Furnas, G. W. 1986. Generalized fisheye views. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 16--23. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Goldberg, J. H. and Kotval, X. P. 1999. Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: Methods and constructs. Int. J. Indus. Ergonom. 24, 6, 631--645.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gutwin, C. 2002. Improving focus targeting in interactive fisheye views. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 267--274. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C. and Fedak, C. 2004a. A comparison of fisheye lenses for interactive layout tasks. In Proceedings of the Conference on Graphics Interface. Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society, Ontario, Canada, 213--220. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C. and Fedak, C. 2004b. Interacting with big interfaces on small screens: A comparison of fisheye, zoom, and panning techniques. In Proceedings of the Conference on Graphics Interface. Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society, Ontario, Canada, 145--152. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gutwin, C. and Skopik, A. 2003. Fisheye views are good for large steering tasks. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 201--208. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hornbæk, K. and Frøkjær, E. 2003. Reading patterns and usability in visualizations of electronic documents. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interac. 10, 2, 119--149. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hornof, A. J. and Halverson, T. 2003. Cognitive strategies and eye movements for searching hierarchical computer displays. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 249--256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jakobsen, M. and Hornbæk, K. 2006. Evaluating a fisheye view of source code. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 377--386. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Keahey, T. A. and Robertson, E. L. 1997. Nonlinear magnification fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 51--58. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Larson, K. and Czerwinski, M. P. 1998. Web page design: Implications of memory, structure and scent for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 25--32. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leung, Y. K. and Apperley, M. D. 1994. A review and taxonomy of distortion-oriented presentation techniques. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 1, 2, 126--160. Google ScholarDigital Library
- MacKenzie, I. S. 1992. Fitts' law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction. Hum. Comput. Interact. 7, 1, 91--139.Google ScholarDigital Library
- McGuffin, M. and Balakrishnan, R. 2004. Acquisition of expanding targets. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 57--64. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McGuffin, M. J., Davison, G., and Balakrishnan, R. 2004. Expand-Ahead: A space-filling strategy for browsing trees. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposim on Information Visualization. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 119--126. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Norman, K. L. 1991. The Psychology of Menu Selection: Designing Cognitive Control at the Human/Computer Interface. Ablex, Norwood, NJ. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Norman, K. L. and Chin, J. P. 1988. The effect of tree structure on search in a hierarchical menu selection system. Behav. Inf. Technol. 7, 1, 51--65.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pirolli, P., Card, S., and van der Wege, M. 2003. The effects of information scent on visual search in the hyperbolic tree browser. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 10, 1, 20--53. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Plaisant, C., Carr, D., and Shneiderman, B. 1995. Image browsers: Taxonomy, guidelines, and informal specifications. IEEE Softw. 12, 2, 21--32. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Raskin, J. 2000. The Humane Interface. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- Rosenthal, R. and Rosnow, R. 1985. Contrast Analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Sarkar, M. and Brown, M. 1992. Graphical fisheye views for graphs. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 83--91. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schaffer, D., Zuo, Z., Greenberg, S., Bartram, L., Dill, J., Dubs, S., and Roseman, M. 1996. Navigating hierarchically clustered networks through fisheye and full-zoom methods. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 3, 2, 162--188. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shneiderman, B. and Plaisant, C. 2005. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 4th ed. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Skopik, A. 2002. The effect of distortion on landmarking in a two-dimensional space. Tech. Rep., University of Saskatchewan. Saskatoon, Canada.Google Scholar
- Spence, R. and Apperley, M. S. 1982. Data base navigation: An office environment for the professional. Behav. Inf. Technol. 1, 1, 43--54.Google ScholarCross Ref
- www.eyeglaze.com. 2004. LC technologies eye-tracker.Google Scholar
- Zellweger, P. T., Mackinlay, J. D., Good, L., Stefik, M., and Baudisch, P. 2003. City lights: contextual views in minimal space. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 838--839. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Untangling the usability of fisheye menus
Recommendations
Fisheye menus
UIST '00: Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technologyExploring a Design Space of Graphical Adaptive Menus: Normal vs. Small Screens
Special Issue on IUI 2018Graphical Adaptive Menus are Graphical User Interface menus whose predicted items of immediate use can be automatically rendered in a prediction window. Rendering this prediction window is a key question for adaptivity to enable the end-user to ...
Transient or permanent fisheye views: a comparative evaluation of source code interfaces
Transient use of information visualization may support specific tasks without permanently changing the user interface. Transient visualizations provide immediate and transient use of information visualization close to and in the context of the user's ...
Comments