Twist, shift, or stack? Usability analysis of geospatial interactions on a tangible tabletop

Maps as learning, exploration and analysis tools have great power to aid understanding of complex phenomena and to instigate and engage discussion. To date, web-mapping platforms have largely contributed to the public availability of geospatial information. Tangible user interfaces (TUI) as an emerging class of interfaces, have a clear potential for improving collaboration around geospatial data, as well as increase geospatial understanding, but to realise this potential they must be easy and straightforward to learn and use. To date, there is a lack of research centred on human interactions with geospatial tangible applications. This paper reports on the results of an initial qualitative usability study carried with novice users on a geospatial tangible table. It discusses aspects related to cartographic elements, object manipulations, and offline interactions, to create an initial set of usability guidelines for geo-tangible tables.

[1]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms , 1997, CHI.

[2]  Joep W. Frens,et al.  Tangible products: redressing the balance between appearance and action , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[3]  Ulrich Leopold,et al.  A geospatial tangible user interface to support stakeholder participation in urban planning , 2015, 2015 1st International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theory, Applications and Management (GISTAM).

[4]  Ed Parsons The Map of the Future May Not Be a Map! , 2013 .

[5]  Patrick Weber,et al.  Towards Usability Engineering for Online Editors of Volunteered Geographic Information: A Perspective on Learnability , 2012, Trans. GIS.

[6]  Stacey,et al.  DESIGNING AND ASSESSING A MULTI-USER TABLETOP INTERFACE TO SUPPORT COLLABORATIVE DECISION-MAKING INVOLVING DYNAMIC GEOSPATIAL DATA , 2011 .

[7]  Menno-Jan Kraak,et al.  Making useful and useable geovisualization , 2005 .

[8]  Ina Wagner,et al.  Expressive interactions - supporting collaboration in urban design , 2007, GROUP.

[9]  Paul Marshall,et al.  Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? , 2007, TEI.

[10]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Number of people required for usability evaluation , 2010, Commun. ACM.

[11]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces , 2000, IBM Syst. J..

[12]  Mordechai Haklay,et al.  Usability evaluation and PPGIS: towards a user-centred design approach , 2003, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[13]  Michael F. Goodchild,et al.  Twenty years of progress: GIScience in 2010 , 2010, J. Spatial Inf. Sci..

[14]  L. Faulkner Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[15]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems , 1993, INTERCHI.

[16]  Jakob Tholander,et al.  Towards a new set of ideals: consequences of the practice turn in tangible interaction , 2008, TEI.

[17]  Eric Ras,et al.  Collaborative Problem Solving with Objects: Physical Aspects of a Tangible Tabletop in Technology-based Assessment , 2012, COOP.

[18]  Mordechai Haklay,et al.  A less‐is‐more approach to geovisualization – enhancing knowledge construction across multidisciplinary teams , 2009, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[19]  Jacob Buur,et al.  Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction , 2006, CHI.

[20]  Rajeev Sharma,et al.  Enabling collaborative geoinformation access and decision‐making through a natural, multimodal interface , 2005, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[21]  Kenneth P. Fishkin,et al.  A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.