ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A Fitts Law comparison of eye tracking and manual input in the selection of visual targets
Full text PdfPdf (814 KB)
Source
International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces archive
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Multimodal interfaces table of contents
Chania, Crete, Greece
SESSION: Multimodal modelling (oral session) table of contents
Pages 241-248  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-60558-198-9
Author
Roel Vertegaal  Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
Sponsors
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 19,   Downloads (12 Months): 164,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1452392.1452443
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We present a Fitts' Law evaluation of a number of eye tracking and manual input devices in the selection of large visual targets. We compared performance of two eye tracking techniques, manual click and dwell time click, with that of mouse and stylus. Results show eye tracking with manual click outperformed the mouse by 16%, with dwell time click 46% faster. However, eye tracking conditions suffered a high error rate of 11.7% for manual click and 43% for dwell time click conditions. After Welford correction eye tracking still appears to outperform manual input, with IPs of 13.8 bits/s for dwell time click, and 10.9 bits/s for manual click. Eye tracking with manual click provides the best tradeoff between speed and accuracy, and was preferred by 50% of participants. Mouse and stylus had IPs of 4.7 and 4.2 respectively. However, their low error rate of 5% makes these techniques more suitable for refined target selection.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
2
3
 
4
Card, S.K., English, W.K., and Burr, B. J. Evaluation of Mouse, Rate-controlled Isometric Joystick, Step Keys and Text Keys for Text Selection on a CRT. Ergonomics Vol. 21 No. 8, 1978, pp. 601--613.
 
5
Crossman, E. R. F. W. and Goodeve, P. J. Feedback Control of Hand Movement and Fitts' Law. In Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 35A, 1983, pp. 251--278, (original unpublished paper 1963).
 
6
 
7
Fitts, P.M. The Information Capacity of the Human Motor System in Controlling the Amplitude of Movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol. 47, 1954, pp. 381--391.
8
 
9
Guiard, Y. Asymmetric Division of Labor in Human Skilled Bimanual Action: The Kinematic Chain as a Model. Journal of Motor Behavior 19, 4, 1987, pp. 486--517
10
11
12
 
13
LC Technologies, Inc. Eyegaze System Manual. www.eyegaze.com, 2004.
 
14
15
 
16
17
 
18
Morimoto, C. et al. Pupil Detection and Tracking Using Multiple Light Sources. Image and Vision Computing 18, 2000.
19
20
21
22
23
24
 
25
Smith, B. Cursor Motion Test Application. http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/basmith/testapp.html, 1999.
26
27
 
28
Tobii Technology. Tobii 1750 Manual. www.tobii.se, 2004.
29
30
 
31
Wacom, Inc. Intuos 2. www.wacom.com, 2004.
32
33
 
34
Welford, A.T. Fundamentals of Skill. London: Methuen, 1968.
 
35
Yarbus, A.L. Eye Movements During Perception of Complex Objects. In Riggs, L.A. (Ed.), Eye Movements and Vision, Ch. VII. New York, NY USA: Plenum Press, 1967, pp. 171--196.
36