A pilot study comparing mouse and mouse-emulating interface devices for graphic input.

Adaptive interface devices make it possible for individuals with physical disabilities to use microcomputers and thus perform many tasks that they would otherwise be unable to accomplish. Special equipment is available that purports to allow functional access to the computer for users with disabilities. As technology moves from purely keyboard applications to include graphic input, it will be necessary for assistive interface devices to support graphics as well as text entry. Headpointing systems that emulate the mouse in combination with on-screen keyboards are of particular interest to persons with severe physical impairment such as high level quadriplegia. Two such systems currently on the market are the HeadMaster and the Free Wheel. The authors have conducted a pilot study comparing graphic input speed using the mouse and two headpointing interface systems on the Macintosh computer. The study used a single subject design with six able-bodied subjects, to establish a baseline for comparison with persons with severe disabilities. Results of these preliminary data indicated that the HeadMaster was nearly as effective as the mouse and that it was superior to the Free Wheel for graphics input. This pilot study, however, demonstrated several experimental design problems that need to be addressed to make the study more robust. It also demonstrated the need to include the evaluation of text input so that the effectiveness of the interface devices with text and graphic input could be compared.