Table 1 - uploaded by Barbara S Chaparro
Content may be subject to copyright.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Touch Screens
Context in source publication
Context 1
... research studies have found that touch screens consistently produced slower and less accurate performance when compared with keyboards (Barrett & Krueger, 1994;Wilson, Inderrieden, & Liu, 1995). Schneiderman (1998) outlines the many advantages and disadvantages to using a touch screen (see Table 1). For the most part, touch screen developers have relied upon the abundant research dealing with mechanical keyboard layouts and their functionality when designing touch screens. ...
Similar publications
Citations
... For the interaction with the IS, a Leap Motion Controller 3 is placed below the IS touchscreen to track the user's right hand and translate the pointing of the index finger to a position on the screen (in a similar setup as Shakeri et al. [34]). The position is calculated in real-time to minimize lag and provide feedback on the steering wheel as instantly as possible, since studies have shown that delaying the feedback increases the total time of eye glances off the road [11]. The projected screen position is filtered to eliminate noise in the movement and in the hand motion detection data. ...
In-car devices are growing both in complexity and capacity, integrating functionalities that used to be divided among other controls in the vehicles. These systems appear increasingly in the form of touchscreens as a cost-saving measure. Screens lack the physicality of traditional buttons or switches, requiring drivers to look away from the road to operate them. This paper presents the design, implementation, and two studies that evaluated HapWheel, a system that provides the driver with haptic feedback in the steering wheel while interacting with an Infotainment System. Results show that the proposed system reduced both the duration of and the number of times a driver looked away from the road. HapWheel was also successful at reducing the number of mistakes during the interaction.
... Visual feedback can take various forms, such as highlighting the component being pressed or pop-up keys on a keyboard. These designs have been shown to facilitate touchscreen usage (Park & Han, 2011) and reduce error rates (Deron, 2000). ...
... With respect to the effectiveness of feedback for improving performance with touchscreens, most studies that were conducted in static environments found that multimodal feedback reduced error rates. For example, Bender (1999) reported a reduction in error rate from 33.3% to 7.6% with auditory feedback for 10 × 10 mm targets, and Deron (2000) reported a reduction from 40% to around 15% with visual feedback for a keypad entry task. These studies reported only the final error counts, after error corrections. ...
Touchscreens are being introduced to various mobile environments that are, at times, affected by vibrations and turbulence, such as modern car cockpits or flight decks of commercial and military aircraft. To assess and enhance the usability of touchscreens in these domains, this experiment examined the performance effects of turbulence on two flight-related tasks and the effectiveness of visual and auditory feedback for supporting error detection, fast completion times and multitasking. Nineteen pilots performed a flight plan entry and a checklist task in calm and turbulent conditions during manual flight and on autopilot. Results show that unaided performance suffers greatly in turbulence, both in terms of the number of errors and completion time. However, visual and auditory feedback both helped reduce these performance costs by improving error detection and multitasking. Participants preferred auditory feedback for text entry during manual flight and in turbulence. The findings from this study can inform the design and evaluation of touch screens for mobile environments, such as the flight deck, ambulances and surveillance operations.
... Feedback is an essential part of every user interface, for the user to acknowledge that the device is responding to his/her actions, as the British Standard ISO 9241-400 (2007) Change in appearance from hollow to solid (Bennion et al., 1981) Graphics change (Valk, 1985) Invert a button colour (Sears, 1991) Visual three dimensional button depression (Deron, 2000) Mobile: ...
... There are few studies which address the effects of visual feedback on usability or user experience in touchscreen virtual button interaction. Deron (2000) feedback, text-field feedback above the number keypad, visual three-dimensional button depression and combination of text-field and the depression. The results showed that any of the feedback yielded significantly fewer errors compared to the no-feedback condition and more user satisfaction, but no significant difference was found between the different feedback designs. ...
Touchscreens are very widely used, especially in mobile phones. They feature many
interaction methods, pressing a virtual button being one of the most popular ones. In addition to an inherent visual feedback, virtual button can provide audio and tactile feedback. Since mobile phones are essentially computers, the processing causes latencies in interaction. However, it has not been known, if the latency is an issue in mobile touchscreen virtual button interaction, and what the latency recommendations for visual, audio and tactile feedback are.
The research in this thesis has investigated multimodal latency in mobile touchscreen virtual button interaction. For the first time, an affordable, but accurate tool was built to measure all three feedback latencies in touchscreens. For the first time, simultaneity perception of touch and feedback, as well as the effect of latency on virtual button perceived quality has been studied and thresholds found for both unimodal and bimodal feedback. The results from these studies were combined as latency guidelines for the first time. These guidelines enable interaction designers to establish requirements for mobile phone engineers to optimise the latencies on the right level.
The latency measurement tool consisted of a high-speed camera, a microphone and an
accelerometer for visual, audio and tactile feedback measurements. It was built with off-theshelf components and, in addition, it was portable. Therefore, it could be copied at low cost or moved wherever needed. The tool enables touchscreen interaction designers to validate latencies in their experiments, making their results more valuable and accurate. The tool could benefit the touchscreen phone manufacturers, since it enables engineers to validate latencies during development of mobile phones. The tool has been used in mobile phone R&D within Nokia Corporation and for validation of a research device within the University of Glasgow.
The guidelines established for unimodal feedback was as follows: visual feedback latency
should be between 30 and 85 ms, audio between 20 and 70 ms and tactile between 5 and 50 ms. The guidelines were found to be different for bimodal feedback: visual feedback latency should be 95 and audio 70 ms when the feedback was visual-audio, visual 100 and tactile 55 ms when the feedback was visual-tactile and tactile 25 and audio 100 ms when the feedback was tactile-audio. These guidelines will help engineers and interaction designers to select and optimise latencies to be low enough, but not too low. Designers using these guidelines will make sure that most of the users will both perceive the feedback as simultaneous with their touch and experience high quality virtual buttons.
The results from this thesis show that latency has a remarkable effect on touchscreen virtual buttons, and it is a key part of virtual button feedback design. The novel results enable researchers, designers and engineers to master the effect of latencies in research and development. This will lead to more accurate and reliable research results and help mobile phone manufacturers make better products.
... On the other hand, depth touch feedback resulted from keys is eliminated when typing with touch screens and therefore the typist becomes more dependent on vision and hearing. For instance, results of a research showed that when typing with a touch screen, if a hearing feedback like a special sound is heard, the typist's performance is accelerated significantly and the number of mistakes is decreased (Deron, 2000). As it was said before, the typist's cognitive loading is different in the case of visual feedback, hearing feedback and elimination of both when typing with a computer keyboard. ...
... Deron's study showed that typist's mistakes are increased while he or she types with touch screens and eliminating visual feedback. Elimination of visual feedback resulted from screen led to maximum mistakes and elimination of feedback resulted from keyboard or writing separately led to typing mistakes increase (Deron, 2000). Another research supported the important role of visual and hearing feedbacks in typing with Chord mobile keyboards. ...
The present research investigates the impact of central and environmental visual feedback resulting from keyboarding components including used organ, keyboard elements and typed text on motor control of this subtle skill. Statistical population of the research included students of Allameh Tabatabaei University who were familiar with typing skill and aged 25±3.3 years. 12 students were selected randomly as sample members. Group members were tested in 9 steps and in each step, they received one of the various states of elimination of central and environmental visual feedback resulted from keyboarding components including: used organ, keyboard elements and typed text. In the end, individuals received tests and implementation times were recorded. The number of correct words typed per minute and also the number of typing mistakes was criteria for scoring individuals. After investigation of normality of data using Shapiro and Belk test and congruency of variances with Levene's test, data were analyzed using repeated measurement variance test. Considering the significance level (0.05), results revealed that elimination of environmental and central visual feedback resulted from organ, keyboard and text has a significant impact on reduction of typing speed and increasing typing mistakes. Finally, results of the research showed that vision has a decisive role in controlling typing skill.
... In the Point Of Sale (POS) context (e.g., cash registers), the provision of auditory feedback can reduce touch screen error rates and lower task completion times (Bender, 1999). In a similar context, the provision of visual feedback has also been shown to reduce error rates when interacting with a touch screen (Deron, 2000). In the automotive context, Heers et al. (2008) found in their first study that participants in Germany and the USA preferred using touch screens that provided a combination of auditory-visual-haptic feedback over touch screens that did not provide any enhanced feedback, or that provided only auditory or visual feedback. ...
... While there were no significant differences in task completion times across the four feedback configurations, there was a trend for drivers to complete the tasks faster when receiving feedback from the system, particularly the visual and combined visual and auditory feedback. Previous research in the POS domain have also found benefits, in terms of faster task completion times, of providing visual and auditory feedback on touch screen interfaces (Bender, 1999;Deron, 2000). In combination with the user preference for the feedback condition, these results suggest that provision of feedback with a touch screen interface may reduce the magnitude of any performance degradation and future efforts in this area should be directed here. ...
This study examined the effects on driving, usability and subjective workload of performing music selection tasks using a touch screen interface. The benefits of providing visual and/or auditory feedback was also explored. Thirty participants performed music selection tasks with a touch screen interface while driving, with four forms of feedback. The music selection tasks significantly increased subjective workload and degraded performance on a range of driving measures. The provision of any form of feedback did not significantly affect driving performance, usability or subjective workload. Results suggest that touch screens may not be a suitable input device for navigating scrollable lists.
... The amount of such markers is limited not only by tactile surface or an overload of sensory canal. Therefore the use of touchpad or touch screen remains as an inefficient method for visually impaired people even at the presence of speech feedback when it is necessary quickly to find or to point a particular item within the keyboard or any layout (Deron, 2001). ...
Acquiring reasonable touch-typing skills is essential for partially sighted students. The goal of our work was to strengthen touchscreen navigation and typing on virtual keyboard using residual visual resources. Visual color patterns displayed with the help of a single two-color light emitting diode coupled to glasses and special layout of tactile markers have been used to design the text entry self-training system. The tactile pointer 110? 40 sq. mm provides 15 clearly detectable positions on the touchscreen and minimizes inadvertent selections. Our results show that multisensory approach reduces a period for tutorial. The adequate color stimulation could also promote deceleration of the degeneration of visual nerve.
Touchscreen interfaces offer benefits in terms of flexibility and ease of interaction and as such their use has increased rapidly in a range of devices, from mobile phones to in-car technology. However, traditional touchscreens impose an inevitable visual workload demand that has implications for safety, especially in automotive use. Recent developments in touchscreen technology have enabled feedback to be provided via the haptic channel. A study was conducted to investigate the effects of visual and haptic touchscreen feedback on visual workload, task performance and subjective response using a medium-fidelity driving simulator. Thirty-six experienced drivers performed touchscreen ‘search and select’ tasks while engaged in a motorway driving task. The study utilised a 3 × 2 within-subjects design, with three levels of visual feedback: ‘immediate’, ‘delayed’, ‘none’; and two levels of haptic feedback: ‘visual only’, ‘visual + haptic’. Results showed that visual workload was increased when visual feedback was delayed or absent; however, introducing haptic feedback counteracted this effect, with no increases observed in glance time and count. Task completion time was also reduced when haptic feedback was enabled, while driving performance showed no effect due to feedback type. Subjective responses indicated that haptic feedback improved the user experience and reduced perceived task difficulty.
Touchscreens are increasingly being used in mobile devices and in-vehicle systems. While the usability benefits of touchscreens are acknowledged, their use places significant visual demand on the user due to the lack of tactile and kinaesthetic feedback. Haptic feedback is shown to improve performance in mobile devices, but little objective data is available regarding touchscreen feedback in an automotive scenario. A study was conducted to investigate the effects of visual and haptic touchscreen feedback on driver visual behaviour and driving performance using a simulated driving environment. Results showed a significant interaction between visual and haptic feedback, with the presence of haptic feedback compensating for changes in visual feedback. Driving performance was unaffected by feedback condition but degraded from a baseline measure when touchscreen tasks were introduced. Subjective responses indicated an improved user experience and increased confidence when haptic feedback was enabled.
