skip to main content
10.1145/3010915.3010922acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesozchiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Exploring callout design in selection task for ultra-small touch screen devices

Published:29 November 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Ultra-small touch screen devices tend to suffer from occlusion or the fat finger problem owing to their limited input area. A callout could solve these problems by displaying a copy of the occluded area in a non-occluded area. However, callout designs for ultra-small touch screen devices have not yet been explored in depth. In this study, we chose three design factors (each factor has two levels) from various factors and conducted an experiment to examine eight callout designs in the selection task for ultra-small touch screen devices. The results of our experiment matched the results from previous research; however, we also obtained results unique to ultra-small devices. The results showed that the selection speed was higher when the content of the callout was changed continuously, the error rate decreased when the content of the callout was changed continuously and a pointer was displayed to indicate the touched position within the callout, and the workload decreased when the content was changed continuously. Further, as a design factor, the position of the callout would not affect the selection performance.

References

  1. Baudisch, P., and Chu, G. Back-of-device interaction allows creating very small touch devices. In Proc. CHI 2009, ACM, 1923--1932. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Brandl, P., Leitner, J., Seifried, T., Haller, M., Doray, B., and To, P. Occlusion-aware menu design for digital tabletops. In Proc. CHI EA 2009, ACM, 3223--3228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Chapuis, O., and Dragicevic, P. Effects of motor scale, visual scale, and quantization on small target acquisition difficulty. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 18, 3 (2011), 13:1--13:32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chen, X. A., Grossman, T., and Fitzmaurice, G. Swipe-board: A text entry technique for ultra-small interfaces that supports novice to expert transitions. In Proc. UIST 2014, ACM, 615--620.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Cockburn, A., Ahlstrm, D., and Gutwin, C. Understanding performance in touch selections: Tap, drag and radial pointing drag with finger, stylus and mouse. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 70, 3 (2012), 218--233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Gordon, M., Ouyang, T., and Zhai, S. WatchWriter: Tap and gesture typing on a smartwatch miniature keyboard with statistical decoding. In Proc. CHI 2016, ACM, 3817--3821. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hart, S. G., and Staveland, L. E. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Human mental workload 1, 3 (1988), 139--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Holz, C., and Baudisch, P. The generalized perceived input point model and how to double touch accuracy by extracting fingerprints. In Proc. CHI 2010, ACM, 581--590. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hong, J., Heo, S., Isokoski, P., and Lee, G. SplitBoard: A simple split soft keyboard for wristwatch-sized touch screens. In Proc. CHI 2015, ACM, 1233--1236. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Ishii, A., Shizuki, B., and Tanaka, J. Evaluation of callout design for ultra-small touch screen devices. In Proc. CHI EA 2016, ACM, 2511--2518. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Khalilbeigi, M., Schmittat, P., Mühlhäuser, M., and Steimle, J. Occlusion-aware interaction techniques for tabletop systems. In Proc. CHI EA 2012, ACM, 2531--2536. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Komninos, A., and Dunlop, M. Text input on a smart watch. Pervasive Computing, IEEE 13, 4 (2014), 50--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Kouchi, M. Aist the measurement data of the hands of the japanese. https://www.dh.aist.go.jp/database/hand/index.html (In Japanese), Last accessed on October 7, 2016, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Leiva, L. A., Sahami, A., Catala, A., Henze, N., and Schmidt, A. Text entry on tiny QWERTY soft keyboards. In Proc. CHI 2015, ACM, 669--678. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. MacKenzie, I. S., Sellen, A., and Buxton, W. A. S. A comparison of input devices in element pointing and dragging tasks. In Proc. CHI 1991, ACM, 161--166. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Miyake, S., and Kumashiro, M. Subjective mental workload assessment technique - an introduction to NASA-TLX and SWAT and a proposal of simple scoring methods -. Human factors and ergonomics 29, 6 (1993), 399--408. (In Japanese).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Oney, S., Harrison, C., Ogan, A., and Wiese, J. Zoom-Board: A diminutive QWERTY soft keyboard using iterative zooming for ultra-small devices. In Proc. CHI 2013, ACM, 2799--2802.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Potter, R. L., Weldon, L. J., and Shneiderman, B. Improving the accuracy of touch screens: An experimental evaluation of three strategies. In Proc. CHI 1988, ACM, 27--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Sears, A., and Shneiderman, B. High precision touchscreens: Design strategies and comparisons with a mouse. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34, 4 (1991), 593--613. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Siek, K. A., Rogers, Y., and Connelly, K. H. Fat finger worries: How older and younger users physically interact with PDAs. In Proc. INTERACT 2005, Springer-Verlag, 267--280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Vogel, D., and Balakrishnan, R. Occlusion-aware interfaces. In Proc. CHI 2010, ACM, 263--272. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Vogel, D., and Baudisch, P. Shift: A technique for operating pen-based interfaces using touch. In Proc. CHI 2007, ACM, 657--666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Xia, H., Grossman, T., and Fitzmaurice, G. NanoStylus: Enhancing input on ultra-small displays with a finger-mounted stylus. In Proc. UIST 2015, ACM, 447--456. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exploring callout design in selection task for ultra-small touch screen devices

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Other conferences
              OzCHI '16: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction
              November 2016
              706 pages
              ISBN:9781450346184
              DOI:10.1145/3010915

              Copyright © 2016 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 29 November 2016

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate362of729submissions,50%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader