Automatic and self-paced scanning for alternative text entry

This paper introduces a novel software for alternative text entry implemented as part of the framework of the HAndsfree Mouse COntrol System HaMCoS. The application lets the user 'write' individual characters as well as completions of unfinished words by iteratively selecting one of multiple options. In addition to representing an instance of conventional scanning (also called indirect text entry), where a selection marker is automatically advanced to the next available option after a certain dwell period has elapsed, the program may be configured to have the user explicitly trigger any marker changes. One main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the two scanning techniques, automatic and self-paced, not only regarding the achievable entry rate, but also concerning usability. With this in mind, several comparative experiments which involve transcribing a specific text fragment have been conducted. The results demonstrate that both variants have advantages and disadvantages. In fact, it turned out that, although being more stressful for the user, automatic scanning allowed faster operation. Besides, it can be shown that the presented software application indeed is a promising alternative for someone who is unable to use any form of direct text entry.

[1]  John Paulin Hansen,et al.  Gaze typing compared with input by head and hand , 2004, ETRA.

[2]  Jun Gong,et al.  Improving dictionary-based disambiguation text entry method accuracy , 2007, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[3]  Dennis J. McFarland,et al.  Brain-computer interface (BCI) operation: signal and noise during early training sessions , 2005, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[4]  Rainer Nordmann,et al.  Alternative Wheelchair Control , 2007 .

[5]  E Donchin,et al.  Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[6]  D. Jeffery Higginbotham,et al.  Evaluation of keystroke savings across five assistive communication technologies , 1992 .

[7]  Horabail S. Venkatagiri.  Efficient keyboard layouts for sequential access in augmentative and alternative communication , 1999 .

[8]  Jean Cardinal,et al.  Designing small keyboards is hard , 2005 .

[9]  Rainer Nordmann,et al.  Alternative text entry using different input methods , 2006, Assets '06.

[10]  Niels Birbaumer,et al.  On the building of binary spelling interfaces for augmentative communication , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  Jean Cardinal,et al.  Designing Small Keyboards Is Hard , 2004, LATIN.

[12]  Melanie Baljko,et al.  Indirect text entry using one or two keys , 2006, Assets '06.

[13]  Rainer Nordmann,et al.  Consolidating computer operation and wheelchair control , 2007, Assets '07.

[14]  Rainer Nordmann,et al.  ALTERNATIVE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR OPERATING A PC USING INTENTIONAL MUSCLE CONTRACTIONS ONLY , 2005 .

[15]  Bernd Freisleben,et al.  HaWCoS: the "hands-free" wheelchair control system , 2002, ASSETS.

[16]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  The thought-translation device (TTD): neurobehavioral mechanisms and clinical outcome , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.