15-06-2012, 02:19 PM
An Evaluation and Comparison of Physical Mobile Interaction Techniques
[attachment=24577]
Abstract.
Mobile devices are more and more used for mobile interactions with
things, places and people in the real world. However, so far no studies have
discussed which interaction techniques are preferred by users in different
contexts. This paper presents an experimental comparison of four different
physical mobile interaction techniques: touching, pointing, scanning and usermediated
object interaction. To evaluate these techniques across different
scenarios and to collect real usage data, four prototypes were implemented: a
system for mobile interaction in smart environments, a mobile tourist guide, a
mobile museum guide and a prototype for mobile interaction with
advertisement posters.
Introduction
An important step towards implementing the vision of ubiquitous computing is the
use of mobile devices, which are the first truly pervasive computers and interaction
devices. So far, most mobile devices, applications and services mainly focus on the
interaction between the user, the mobile device and available services. The context of
use is often not considered at all or only marginally. This does not conform to our
everyday life and behaviour in which context plays a central role.
Physical Mobile Interactions
A detailed overview and discussion of physical mobile interaction techniques can be
found in [4, 5]. The aim of this section is primarily to give an introduction into the
interaction techniques touching, pointing, scanning and user-mediated object
interaction that is needed for the understanding for the following text.
By means of the interaction technique touching the user can select a real world
object by touching it with a mobile device or by bringing them close together (e.g. 0 -
5 cm).
Prototypes
As already mentioned four prototypes were developed and evaluated. The first
subsection describes their purpose and their usage in the user studies. The following
subsection then discusses how these prototypes were implemented with different
technology.
Selected Results of the User Studies
This section discusses the methodology that was used within all four user studies.
After this, every following subsection discusses the results of the evaluation of one
prototype and its supported interaction techniques. Only the most relevant, interesting
and unexpected results are presented.
Mobile Tourist Guide
A two-day user-study, in which 17 persons participated, was conducted in the
Petuelpark in Munich (Germany) in November 2005. Mostly two participants used
the prototype at the same time to simulate the more realistic situation that a small
group or a couple is jointly walking through a park and not just a single person on its
own. The two participants were asked to interact with six exhibits whereby the
prototype was given to the other person after every interaction and every person had
to use each of the three supported interaction techniques. After having used the
prototype we asked the participants to rate the interaction techniques regarding the
attributes simple, enjoyable, innovative and reliable. The corresponding results are
depicted in the following Figure 2.
Conclusion
In this paper we have presented a comprehensive experimental evaluation and
comparison of the physical mobile interaction techniques touching, pointing, scanning
and user-mediated object interaction. Therefore four different user studies were
conducted in which the interaction techniques were evaluated in the context of mobile
interaction in smart environments, a mobile tourist guide, a mobile museum guide and
mobile interaction with advertisement posters.
[attachment=24577]
Abstract.
Mobile devices are more and more used for mobile interactions with
things, places and people in the real world. However, so far no studies have
discussed which interaction techniques are preferred by users in different
contexts. This paper presents an experimental comparison of four different
physical mobile interaction techniques: touching, pointing, scanning and usermediated
object interaction. To evaluate these techniques across different
scenarios and to collect real usage data, four prototypes were implemented: a
system for mobile interaction in smart environments, a mobile tourist guide, a
mobile museum guide and a prototype for mobile interaction with
advertisement posters.
Introduction
An important step towards implementing the vision of ubiquitous computing is the
use of mobile devices, which are the first truly pervasive computers and interaction
devices. So far, most mobile devices, applications and services mainly focus on the
interaction between the user, the mobile device and available services. The context of
use is often not considered at all or only marginally. This does not conform to our
everyday life and behaviour in which context plays a central role.
Physical Mobile Interactions
A detailed overview and discussion of physical mobile interaction techniques can be
found in [4, 5]. The aim of this section is primarily to give an introduction into the
interaction techniques touching, pointing, scanning and user-mediated object
interaction that is needed for the understanding for the following text.
By means of the interaction technique touching the user can select a real world
object by touching it with a mobile device or by bringing them close together (e.g. 0 -
5 cm).
Prototypes
As already mentioned four prototypes were developed and evaluated. The first
subsection describes their purpose and their usage in the user studies. The following
subsection then discusses how these prototypes were implemented with different
technology.
Selected Results of the User Studies
This section discusses the methodology that was used within all four user studies.
After this, every following subsection discusses the results of the evaluation of one
prototype and its supported interaction techniques. Only the most relevant, interesting
and unexpected results are presented.
Mobile Tourist Guide
A two-day user-study, in which 17 persons participated, was conducted in the
Petuelpark in Munich (Germany) in November 2005. Mostly two participants used
the prototype at the same time to simulate the more realistic situation that a small
group or a couple is jointly walking through a park and not just a single person on its
own. The two participants were asked to interact with six exhibits whereby the
prototype was given to the other person after every interaction and every person had
to use each of the three supported interaction techniques. After having used the
prototype we asked the participants to rate the interaction techniques regarding the
attributes simple, enjoyable, innovative and reliable. The corresponding results are
depicted in the following Figure 2.
Conclusion
In this paper we have presented a comprehensive experimental evaluation and
comparison of the physical mobile interaction techniques touching, pointing, scanning
and user-mediated object interaction. Therefore four different user studies were
conducted in which the interaction techniques were evaluated in the context of mobile
interaction in smart environments, a mobile tourist guide, a mobile museum guide and
mobile interaction with advertisement posters.