Walk 'n scroll: a comparison of software-based navigation techniques for different levels of mobility

In this paper, we present a field study comparing software-based navigation techniques (scrollbars, tap-and-drag, and touch-n-go) on mobile devices. In particular, we were interested in exploring the efficiency and user preference of these navigation techniques for different levels of mobility (sitting, walking, and standing) in a naturalistic environment. Results show that while there was no significant difference in performance between tap-and-drag and touch-n-go, both techniques significantly outperformed scrollbars for simple, multi-directional navigation tasks. In addition, the users preferred the touch-n-go technique over the other two methods. The results also revealed that users' interactions and preferences differed between the levels of mobility.

[1]  Steve Howard,et al.  Evaluating the usability of a mobile guide: The influence of location, participants and resources , 2005, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[2]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  TouchEngine: a tactile display for handheld devices , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[3]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  A paradigm shift: alternative interaction techniques for use with mobile & wearable devices , 2003, CASCON.

[4]  Joanna Lumsden,et al.  Mobile Note Taking: Investigating the Efficacy of Mobile Text Entry , 2004, Mobile HCI.

[5]  Parisa Eslambolchilar,et al.  Multimodal feedback for tilt controlled speed dependent automatic zooming , 2004 .

[6]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  Dual touch: a two-handed interface for pen-based PDAs , 2000, UIST '00.

[7]  Roy Want,et al.  Squeeze me, hold me, tilt me! An exploration of manipulative user interfaces , 1998, CHI.

[8]  Kiyokuni Kawachiya,et al.  NaviPoint: an input device for mobile information browsing , 1998, CHI.

[9]  Monica M. C. Schraefel,et al.  The radial scroll tool: scrolling support for stylus- or touch-based document navigation , 2004, UIST '04.

[10]  J. F. Bartlett,et al.  Rock 'n' Scroll Is Here to Stay , 2000 .

[11]  Shumin Zhai,et al.  Improving Browsing Performance: A study of four input devices for scrolling and pointing tasks , 1997, INTERACT.

[12]  Takeo Igarashi,et al.  Speed-dependent automatic zooming for browsing large documents , 2000, UIST '00.

[13]  Lars Weberg,et al.  A piece of butter on the PDA display , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[14]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Overcoming the Lack of Screen Space on Mobile Computers , 2002, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[15]  Mikael Wiberg,et al.  Scrollpad: tangible scrolling with mobile devices , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[16]  Connor Graham,et al.  A Review of Mobile HCI Research Methods , 2003, Mobile HCI.

[17]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  Tilting operations for small screen interfaces , 1996, UIST '96.

[18]  Parisa Eslambolchilar,et al.  Tilt-Based Automatic Zooming and Scaling in Mobile Devices - A State-Space Implementation , 2004, Mobile HCI.

[19]  Kori Inkpen Quinn,et al.  Rendezvousing with location-aware devices: Enhancing social coordination , 2005, Interact. Comput..

[20]  Jeff A. Johnson.  A comparison of user interfaces for panning on a touch-controlled display , 1995, CHI '95.

[21]  Jan Stage,et al.  New techniques for usability evaluation of mobile systems , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Gestural and audio metaphors as a means of control for mobile devices , 2002, CHI.

[23]  Ronald M. Baecker,et al.  Readings in human-computer interaction : toward the year 2000 , 1995 .

[24]  Vibha Sazawal,et al.  TiltType: accelerometer-supported text entry for very small devices , 2002, UIST '02.

[25]  Daniel J. Wigdor,et al.  TiltText: using tilt for text input to mobile phones , 2003, UIST '03.

[26]  J. McGrath.  Methodology matters: doing research in the behavioral and social sciences , 1995 .

[27]  Ka-Ping Yee,et al.  Peephole displays: pen interaction on spatially aware handheld computers , 2003, CHI '03.