The perceptual structure of multidimensional input device selection

ABSTRACT

Concepts such as the logical device, taxonomies, and other descriptive frameworks have improved understanding of input devices but ignored or else treated informally their pragmatic qualities, which are fundamental to selection of input devices for tasks. We seek the greater leverage of a predictive theoretical framework by basing our investigation of three-dimensional vs. two-dimensional input devices on Garner's theory of processing of perceptual structure in multidimensional tasks. Two three-dimensional tasks may seem equivalent, but if they involve different types of perceptual spaces, they should be assigned correspondingly different input devices. Our experiment supports this hypothesis and thus both indicates when to use three-dimensional input devices and gives credence to our theoretical basis for this indication.

REFERENCES

• 1: L.B. Achille, "Considerations in the Design and Development of a Human Computer Interaction Laboratory," NRL Report 9279, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C. (1990).
• 2: Teresa W. Bleser , John Sibert, Toto: a tool for selecting interaction techniques, Proceedings of the 3rd annual ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on User interface software and technology, p.135-142, October 03-05, 1990, Snowbird, Utah, United States [doi>10.1145/97924.97940]
• 3: Teresa Worthington Bleser, An input device model of interactive systems design, George Washington University, Washington, DC, 1991
• 4: William Buxton, Lexical and pragmatic considerations of input structures, ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, v.17 n.1, p.31-37, January 1983 [doi>10.1145/988584.988586]
• 5: Stuart K. Card , Allen Newell , Thomas P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1983
• 6: Stuart K. Card , Jock D. Mackinlay , George G. Robertson, The design space of input devices, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.117-124, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97263]
• 7: James D. Foley , Victor L. Wallace , Peggy Chan, The human factors of computer graphics interaction techniques, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, v.4 n.11, p.13-48, Nov. 1984
• 8: W.R. Garner and G.L. Felfoldy, "integrality of Stimulus Dimensions in Various Types of Information Processing," Cognitive Psychology 1 pp. 225-241 (1970).
• 9: W.R. Garner, The Processing of Information and Structure, Lawrence Erlbaum, Potomac, Md. (1974).
• 10: GSPC, "Status Report of the Graphics Standards Planning Committee," Computer Graphics 11 (1977).
• 11: S. Handel and S. imai, "The Free Classification of Analyzable and Unanalyzable Stimuli," Perception and Psychophysics 12 pp. 108-116 (1972).
• 12: S. Imai and W.R. Garner, "Structure in Perceptual Classification," Psychonomic Monograph Supplements 2(9) (1968). Whole No. 25.
• 13: J.D. Mackinlay, S.K. Card, and G.G. Robertson, "A Semantic Analysis of the Design Space of Input Devices," Human- Computer Interaction 5 pp. 145-190 (1990).

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Interaction styles (e.g., commands, menus, forms, direct manipulation); Input devices and strategies (e.g., mouse, touchscreen)

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Theory

Keywords:
Polhemus tracker, gesture input, input devices, integrality, interaction techniques, perceptual space, separability