A Comparison of Fisheye Lenses for Interactive Layout Tasks

Interactive fisheye views allow users to edit data and manipulate objects through the distortion lens. Although several varieties of fisheye lens exist, little is known about how the different types fare for different interactive tasks. In this paper, we investigate one kind of interaction -- layout of graphical objects -- that can be problematic in fisheyes. Layout involves judgments of distance, alignment, and angle, all of which can be adversely affected by the distortion of a fisheye. We compared performance on layout tasks with three kinds of fisheye: a full-screen pyramid lens, a constrained hemispherical lens, and a constrained flat-topped hemisphere. We found that accuracy was significantly better with the constrained lenses compared to the full-screen lens, and also that the simple hemisphere was better at higher levels of distortion than the flat-topped version. The study shows that although there is a cost to doing layout through distortion, it is feasible, particularly with constrained lenses. In addition, our findings provide initial empirical evidence of the differences between competing fisheye varieties.

[1]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[2]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Fisheyes are good for large steering tasks , 2003, CHI '03.

[3]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[4]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  Fundamental issues of visual perception for effective image generation , 1999, SIGGRAPH 1999.

[5]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Fisheye Views are Good for Large Steering Tasks , 2003 .

[6]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  3-dimensional pliable surfaces: for the effective presentation of visual information , 1995, UIST '95.

[7]  Ramana Rao,et al.  A focus+context technique based on hyperbolic geometry for visualizing large hierarchies , 1995, CHI '95.

[8]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Movement time prediction in human-computer interfaces , 1992 .

[9]  Brian D. Fisher,et al.  CZWeb: Fish-Eye Views for Visualizing the World-Wide Web , 1997, HCI.

[10]  H. Schiffman Sensation and perception: An integrated approach, 3rd ed. , 1990 .

[11]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Improving focus targeting in interactive fisheye views , 2002, CHI.

[12]  Dan R. Olsen,et al.  Developing user interfaces , 1998 .

[13]  Jock D. Mackinlay,et al.  The document lens , 1993, UIST '93.

[14]  Hausi A. Müller,et al.  Customizing a Fisheye View Algorithm to Preserve the Mental Map , 1999, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[15]  Steven P. Reiss,et al.  Stretching the rubber sheet: a metaphor for viewing large layouts on small screens , 1993, UIST '93.

[16]  Colin Ware,et al.  Information Visualization: Perception for Design , 2000 .

[17]  J. Moran,et al.  Sensation and perception , 1980 .

[18]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  A framework for unifying presentation space , 2001, UIST '01.

[19]  Mark D. Apperley,et al.  A review and taxonomy of distortion-oriented presentation techniques , 1994, TCHI.

[20]  Manojit Sarkar,et al.  Graphical fisheye views of graphs , 1992, CHI.

[21]  Saul Greenberg,et al.  Navigating hierarchically clustered networks through fisheye and full-zoom methods , 1996, TCHI.

[22]  Benjamin B. Bederson,et al.  Fisheye menus , 2000, UIST '00.

[23]  Michael John,et al.  Fitts' Law and Expanding Targets: An Experimental Study, and Applications to User Interface Design , 2002 .

[24]  James D. Hollan,et al.  Direct Manipulation Interfaces , 1985, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[25]  Shumin Zhai,et al.  Beyond Fitts' law: models for trajectory-based HCI tasks , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.