ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A mischief of mice: examining children's performance in single display groupware systems with 1 to 32 mice
Full text PdfPdf (1.14 MB)
Source
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems archive
Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems table of contents
Boston, MA, USA
SESSION: Systems for children table of contents
Pages 2157-2166  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISBN:978-1-60558-246-7
Authors
Neema Moraveji  Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Kori Inkpen  Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA, USA
Ed Cutrell  Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA, USA
Ravin Balakrishnan  University of Toronto, Toronto, 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): 25,   Downloads (12 Months): 162,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1518701.1519030
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Mischief is a system for classroom interaction that allows multiple children to use individual mice and cursors to interact with a single large display [20]. While the system can support large groups of children, it is unclear how children's performance is affected as group size increases. We explore this question via a study involving two tasks, with children working in group sizes ranging from 1 to 32. The first required reciprocal selection of two on-screen targets, resembling a swarm pointing scenario that might be used in educational applications. The second, a more temporally and spatially distributed pointing task, had children entering different words by selecting characters on an on-screen keyboard. Results indicate that performance is significantly affected by group size only when targets are small. Further, group size had a smaller effect when pointing was spatially and temporally distributed than when everyone was concurrently aiming at the same targets.


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
Fittts, P.M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J. of Exp. Psychology, 47. p. 381--391.
 
5
6
7
8
9
10
 
11
12
13
 
14
Joiner, R., Messer, D., Light, P.&Littleton, K. (1998). It is best to point for young children: A comparison of children's pointing and dragging. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(3). p. 513--529.
 
15
Jones, T. (1991). An empirical study of children's use of computer pointing devices. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(1). p. 61--76.
 
16
King, J.&Alloway, N. (1993). Young children's use of microcomputer input devices. Computers in the Schools, 9. p. 39--53.
 
17
Kucera, H&Francis, W.N. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
 
18
19
20
21
 
22
23
 
24
Salmoni, A. W.&McIlwain, J. S. (1979). Fitts' reciprocal tapping task: A measure of motor capacity? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49. p. 403--413.
 
25
 
26
Stanton, D.,&Neale H.R. (2003). The effects of multiple mice on children's talk and interaction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(2). p. 220--228.
 
27
Sugden, D. A. (1980). Movement speed in children. Journal of Motor Behavior, 12. p. 125--132.
28
 
29
Wallace, S. A., Newell, K. M.&Wade, M. G. (1978). Decision and response times as a function of movement difficulty in preschool children. Child Development, 49.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Neema Moraveji: colleagues
Kori Inkpen: colleagues
Ed Cutrell: colleagues
Ravin Balakrishnan: colleagues