Designing touchpad user-interfaces for vehicles: which tasks are most suitable?

Designers of in-vehicle computing systems must consider which input devices are most suitable for use in the safety-critical driving situation. This paper describes a study aiming to establish which tasks are best supported by an in-vehicle touchpad system. Eighteen participants (50:50 right/left handed) drove three routes in a right-hand drive simulator while following a lead vehicle at a perceived safe distance. At specific points, participants were asked to carry out seven tasks of varying qualities using a prototype touchpad system, a touchscreen or a rotary controller interface. Results indicated that participants were most negative (in terms of preferences and performance) with the rotary controller interface. Conversely, the results for the touchpad versus the touchscreen interfaces were clearly task dependent. For instance, with the touchpad, subjective opinions and objective performance were most positive for tasks in which simple commands enabled drivers to bypass the need for complex menu interactions (e.g. changing the interior temperature). In contrast, results for the touchscreen were evidently superior for simple menu selection tasks (e.g. selecting a preset radio station). Conclusions are drawn regarding the nature of tasks that are best suited to alternative input devices within vehicles and the potential for a touchpad/touchscreen solution.

[1]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Writing to your car: handwritten text input while driving , 2009, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[2]  G. Bartoo,et al.  Design controls , 2003, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[3]  M. Sivak.  The Information That Drivers Use: Is it Indeed 90% Visual? , 1996, Perception.

[4]  John D. Lee,et al.  Driver Distraction : Theory, Effects, and Mitigation , 2008 .

[5]  Colin Potts,et al.  Design of Everyday Things , 1988 .

[6]  Omer Tsimhoni,et al.  DESTINATION ENTRY WHILE DRIVING: SPEECH RECOGNITION VERSUS A TOUCH- SCREEN KEYBOARD , 2002 .

[7]  Michael A. Regan,et al.  Driver distraction: A review of the literature , 2003 .

[8]  L Parmer Tijerina.  DRIVER WORKLOAD ASSESSMENT OF ROUTE GUIDANCE SYSTEM DESTINATION ENTRY WHILE DRIVING: A TEST TRACK STUDY , 1998 .

[9]  David Causeur,et al.  HMI ASPECTS OF THE USABILITY OF INTERNET SERVICES WITH AN IN-CAR TERMINAL ON A DRIVING SIMULATOR , 2001 .

[10]  Gary E. Burnett.  On-the-Move and in Your Car: An Overview of HCI Issues for In-Car Computing , 2009, Int. J. Mob. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[11]  Steve Summerskill,et al.  Writing and Driving: An Assessment of Handwriting Recognition as a Means of Alphanumeric Data Entry in a Driving Context , 2005 .

[12]  Johan Engström,et al.  Effects of visual and cognitive load in real and simulated motorway driving , 2005 .

[13]  James P Foley.  Now You See It, Now You Don't: Visual Occlusion as a Surrogate Distraction Measurement Technique , 2009 .

[14]  Steve Summerskill,et al.  Feeling your way home: the use of haptic interfaces within cars to make safety pleasurable , 2003 .

[15]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing The User Interface , 2013 .

[16]  Gary E. Burnett,et al.  An extended keystroke level model (KLM) for predicting the visual demand of in-vehicle information systems , 2007, CHI.

[17]  Gary E. Burnett,et al.  On-the-move destination entry for vehicle navigation systems: Unsafe by any means? , 2004, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[18]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Handbook of human factors. , 1987 .

[19]  Glyn Lawson,et al.  Designing touchpad user-interfaces for right-hand drive vehicles: an investigation into where the touchpad should be located , 2013, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[20]  Jesse Orlansky,et al.  DESIGN OF CONTROLS , 1956 .