Design and evaluation case study: evaluating the kinect device in the task of natural interaction in a visualization system

We verify the hypothesis that Microsoft’s Kinect device is tailored for defining more efficient interaction compared to the commodity mouse device in the context of information visualization. For this goal, we used Kinect during interaction design and evaluation considering an application on information visualization (over agrometeorological, cars, and flowers datasets). The devices were tested over a visualization technique based on clouds of points (multidimensional projection) that can be manipulated by rotation, scaling, and translation. The design was carried according to technique Participatory Design (ISO 13407) and the evaluation answered to a vast set of Usability Tests. In the tests, the users reported high satisfaction scores (easiness and preference) but, also, they signed out with low efficiency scores (time and precision). In the specific context of a multidimensional-projection visualization, our conclusion is that, in respect to user acceptance, Kinect is a device adequate for natural interaction; but, for desktop-based production, it still cannot compete with the traditional long-term mouse design.

[1]  Robert A. Virzi,et al.  Refining the Test Phase of Usability Evaluation: How Many Subjects Is Enough? , 1992 .

[2]  Paloma Martínez,et al.  Towards the Achievement of Natural Interaction , 2009 .

[3]  Thomas Gallagher,et al.  Usability Testing for the Rest of Us: The Application of Discount Usability Principles in the Development of an Online Communications Assessment Application , 2013, Teaching and learning in medicine.

[4]  Alberto Del Bimbo Special issue on natural interaction , 2007, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[5]  Michael Riis Andersen,et al.  Kinect Depth Sensor Evaluation for Computer Vision Applications , 2012 .

[6]  Mario Ciampi,et al.  Controller-free exploration of medical image data: Experiencing the Kinect , 2011, 2011 24th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS).

[7]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[8]  Sharon Poggenpohl,et al.  Thoughtful Interaction Design: A Design Perspective on Information Technology , 2007 .

[9]  Agma J. M. Traina,et al.  Combining Visual Analytics and Content Based Data Retrieval Technology for Efficient Data Analysis , 2010, 2010 14th International Conference Information Visualisation.

[10]  Albert A. Rizzo,et al.  FAAST: The Flexible Action and Articulated Skeleton Toolkit , 2011, 2011 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference.

[11]  Yao-Jen Chang,et al.  A Kinect-based system for physical rehabilitation: a pilot study for young adults with motor disabilities. , 2011, Research in developmental disabilities.

[12]  Wilfried Kubinger,et al.  Evaluation of Kinect depth sensor for use in mobile robotics , 2011 .

[13]  Tore Gulden,et al.  Participatory Design for Well-Being , 2012 .

[14]  Alessandro Valli,et al.  The design of natural interaction , 2008, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[15]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics , 2005 .

[16]  Sander Oude Elberink,et al.  Accuracy and Resolution of Kinect Depth Data for Indoor Mapping Applications , 2012, Sensors.

[17]  P. Asaro Transforming society by transforming technology: the science and politics of participatory design , 2000 .

[18]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  FastMap: a fast algorithm for indexing, data-mining and visualization of traditional and multimedia datasets , 1995, SIGMOD '95.

[19]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Interaction Design Beyond the Product: Creating Technology-Enhanced Activity Spaces , 2011, Hum. Comput. Interact..