skip to main content
10.1145/3411763.3451655acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Potential of Wrist-worn Vibrotactile Feedback to Enhance the Perception of Virtual Objects during Mid-air Gestures

Published:08 May 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Numerous systems based on mid-air gestures have recently been proposed as a digital variant of object manipulation with hands. Simultaneously, however, direct haptic feedback is lost, eliminating an important aspect that we are familiar with from real-life interaction. We believe that smartwatches, as widely used personal devices, could provide a platform for accessible, flexible, and unobtrusive integration of haptic feedback into mid-air gesture interaction. We prototyped a vibrotactile wrist band with four vibration actuators aiming at communicating invisible, undetectable virtual object properties such as electricity, weight, and tension into 3D haptic experiences. In this paper, we present findings from a user study (n=18) that examined the suitability of different vibration patterns (variation in intensity, temporal profile, rhythm, and location). Results show that all feedback variants have a positive impact on user experience (UX) when interacting with virtual objects. Constant, continuous patterns outweigh the other variants examined.

References

  1. Jongeun Cha, Lara Rahal, and Abdulmotaleb El Saddik. 2008. A pilot study on simulating continuous sensation with two vibrating motors. In 2008 IEEE International Workshop on Haptic Audio visual Environments and Games. IEEE, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 143–147. https://doi.org/10.1109/HAVE.2008.4685314Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Roger W. Cholewiak and Amy A. Collins. 2003. Vibrotactile localization on the arm: Effects of place, space, and age. Perception & Psychophysics 65, 7 (Oct. 2003), 1058–1077. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194834Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Aakar Gupta, Thomas Pietrzak, Nicolas Roussel, and Ravin Balakrishnan. 2016. Direct Manipulation in Tactile Displays. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, San Jose, California, USA, 3683–3693. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858161Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Apple Inc.2021. Representing Haptic Patterns in AHAP Files | Apple Developer Documentation. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/corehaptics/representing_haptic_patterns_in_ahap_filesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Roger W. Johnson. 1996. Fitting Percentage of Body Fat to Simple Body Measurements. Journal of Statistics Education 4, 1 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.1996.11910505Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Dan R. Kenshalo. 1986. Somesthetic Sensitivity in Young and Elderly Humans. Journal of Gerontology 41, 6 (Nov. 1986), 732–742. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/41.6.732 Publisher: Oxford Academic.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Gordon Legge, Cindee Madison, Brenna Vaughn, Allen Cheong, and Joseph Miller. 2008. Retention of high tactile acuity throughout the life span in blindness. Perception & psychophysics 70 (12 2008), 1471–88. https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.8.1471Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Joanne Leong, Patrick Parzer, Florian Perteneder, Teo Babic, Christian Rendl, Anita Vogl, Hubert Egger, Alex Olwal, and Michael Haller. 2016. ProCover: Sensory Augmentation of Prosthetic Limbs Using Smart Textile Covers. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Tokyo, Japan) (UIST ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984572Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. James R. Lewis and Oundefineduzhan Erdinç. 2017. User Experience Rating Scales with 7, 11, or 101 Points: Does It Matter?J. Usability Studies 12, 2 (Feb. 2017), 73–91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yi-Chi Liao, Yi-Ling Chen, Jo-Yu Lo, Rong-Hao Liang, Liwei Chan, and Bing-Yu Chen. 2016. EdgeVib: Effective Alphanumeric Character Output Using a Wrist-Worn Tactile Display. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology(UIST ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 595–601. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984522Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Löfvenberg and R.S. Johansson. 1984. Regional differences and interindividual variability in sensitivity to vibration in the glabrous skin of the human hand. Brain Research 301, 1 (1984), 65 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(84)90403-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Zhuoluo Ma, Yue Liu, Dejiang Ye, and Lu Zhao. 2019. Vibrotactile Wristband for Warning and Guiding in Automated Vehicles. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland UK) (CHI EA ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3312819Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Flavia Mancini, Armando Bauleo, Jonathan Cole, Fausta Lui, Carlo Porro, Patrick Haggard, and Gian Iannetti. 2014. Whole-Body Mapping of Spatial Acuity for Pain and Touch. Annals of Neurology 75 (06 2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24179Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Michael Matscheko, Alois Ferscha, Andreas Riener, and Manuel Lehner. 2010. Tactor placement in wrist worn wearables. International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC) 2010 75 (2010), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISWC.2010.5665867Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Anton Nijholt, Leonardo Giusti, Andrea Minuto, and Patrizia Marti. 2012. Smart Material Interfaces: ”A Material Step to the Future”. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Smart Material Interfaces: A Material Step to the Future (Santa Monica, California) (SMI ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 1, 3 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2459056.2459057Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. I. Oakley, Yeongmi Kim, Junhun Lee, and Jeha Ryu. 2006. Determining the Feasibility of Forearm Mounted Vibrotactile Displays. In 2006 14th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. IEEE, Alexandria, VA, USA, 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/HAPTIC.2006.1627079 ISSN: 2324-7355.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Erik Pescara, Michael Beigl, and Matthias Budde. 2016. RüttelFlug: A Wrist-Worn Sensing Device for Tactile Vertical Velocity Perception in 3d-Space. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (Heidelberg, Germany) (ISWC ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1145/2971763.2971795Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Evan Pezent, Ali Israr, Majed Samad, Shea Robinson, Priyanshu Agarwal, Hrvoje Benko, and Nick Colonnese. 2019. Tasbi: Multisensory Squeeze and Vibrotactile Wrist Haptics for Augmented and Virtual Reality. In 2019 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC). IEEE, Tokyo, Japan, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/WHC.2019.8816098Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Evan Pezent, Marcia K. O’Malley, Ali Israr, Majed Samad, Shea Robinson, Priyanshu Agarwal, Hrvoje Benko, and Nicholas Colonnese. 2020. Explorations of Wrist Haptic Feedback for AR/VR Interactions with Tasbi. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3383151Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Jose Salazar, Keisuke Okabe, and Yasuhisa Hirata. 2018. Path-Following Guidance Using Phantom Sensation Based Vibrotactile Cues Around the Wrist. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 3, 3 (July 2018), 2485–2492. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2018.2810939Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Martin Schrepp, Andreas Hinderks, and Jörg Thomaschewski. 2017. Design and Evaluation of a Short Version of the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ-S). International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence 4 (01 2017), 103. https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2017.09.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Yuh-Chuan Shih and Bi-Fen Tsai. 2007. Splint Effect on the Range of Wrist Motion and Typing Performance. In Ergonomics and Health Aspects of Work with Computers(Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Marvin J. Dainoff (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73333-1_18Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Jo-Hsi Tang, Giuseppe Raffa, and Liwei Chan. 2020. Design of Vibrotactile Direction Feedbacks on Wrist for Three-Dimensional Spatial Guidance. In Cross-Cultural Design. User Experience of Products, Services, and Intelligent Environments(Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Pei-Luen Patrick Rau (Ed.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49788-0_13Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. H. Tankovska. 2020. Global smartwatch unit sales forecast 2018-2023. https://www.statista.com/statistics/878144/worldwide-smart-wristwear-shipments-forecast/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Christopher D Wickens. 2008. Multiple resources and mental workload. Human factors 50, 3 (2008), 449–455. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288394Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Potential of Wrist-worn Vibrotactile Feedback to Enhance the Perception of Virtual Objects during Mid-air Gestures
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      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 Conferences
        CHI EA '21: Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 2021
        2965 pages
        ISBN:9781450380959
        DOI:10.1145/3411763

        Copyright © 2021 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 the author(s) 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: 8 May 2021

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • poster
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

        Upcoming Conference

        CHI '24
        CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 11 - 16, 2024
        Honolulu , HI , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format