The application of spatialization and spatial metaphor to augmentative and alternative communication

ABSTRACT

The University of Delaware and the University of Dundee are collaborating on a project that is investigating the application of spatialization and spatial metaphors to interfaces for Augmentative and Alternative Communication. This paper outlines the project's motivation, goals, and methodological considerations. It presents a number of design principles obtained from a review of the HCI literature. Finally, it describes progress on the demonstration of this approach. This application called VAL provides a computer-based word board that retains spatial equivalence to the user's paper-based system. It also allows the user to access an extended lexicon through an interface to the WordNet lexical database.

REFERENCES

• 1: Christopher Ahlberg , Ben Shneiderman, Visual information seeking: tight coupling of dynamic query filters with starfield displays, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: celebrating interdependence, p.313-317, April 24-28, 1994, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/191666.191775]
• 2: Beukelman, D., Y orkston, K., & Dowden, P. Communication Augmentation: A Casebook of Clinical Management. College Hill Press, San Diego, CA, 1985.
• 3: Bolt, R. The Human Interface. Lifetime Learning Publications, Belmont. CA, 1984,
• 4: Buxton, W. There's more to interaction than meets the eye: some issues in manual input. In D. Norman & S. Draper (eds.), User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N J, 1986.
• 5: W. Buxton , B. Myers, A study in two-handed input, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.321-326, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 6: Stuart K. Card , George G. Robertson , Jock D. Mackinlay, The information visualizer, an information workspace, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, p.181-186, April 27-May 02, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/108844.108874]
• 7: Dillon, A., McKnight, C., & Richardson, l. (1993) Space---the final chapter or why physical representations are not semantic intentions, in C. McKnight, A. Dillon & J. Richardson (eds.) Hypertext: A Psychological Perspective. Ellis Horwood, New York, 1993
• 8: Susan T. Dumais , William P. Jones, A comparison of symbolic and spatial filing, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.127-130, April 1985, San Francisco, California, United States
• 9: Elm, W. & Woods, D. Getting lost: a case study in interface design. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 29th Annual Meeting. Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA, 1985,927-931.
• 10: Erikson, T. D. Working with interface metaphors. In B. Laurel (ed.), The An of Human-Computer interface Design. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990, 65-74.
• 11: Foulds, R. Communication rates for nonspeech expression as a function of manual tasks and linguistic constraints. Proceedings of the International Conference on Rehabilitation Engineering. RESNA, Arlington, VA, 1980, 83--87.
• 12: Gardner, H. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York, 1983.
• 13: Nick Hammond , Lesley Allinson, The travel metaphor as design principle and training aid for navigating around complex systems, Proceedings of Third Conference of the British Computer Society Human-Interactio on People and computers III, p.75-90, February 1988, Univ. of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
• 14: Kay, A. User interface: a personal view. In B. Laurel (ed.), The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990, 191-208.
• 15: Kuhn, W. & Frank, A. U. Spatial metaphors for user interfaces. Proceedings of ACM INTERCH1 '93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems---Adjunct Proceedings. ACM, New York, 1993, 220.
• 16: Jock D. Mackinlay , George G. Robertson , Stuart K. Card, The perspective wall: detail and context smoothly integrated, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, p.173-176, April 27-May 02, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/108844.108870]
• 17: Markman, E. M. How children constrain the possible meanings of words, in Uric Neisser (ed.) Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.
• 18: McDonald, E. T. & Schultz, A. R. Communication boards for cerebral-palsied children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders. 38(1, 1972), 73-88.
• 19: McGregor, A, Personal Communication, 1994.
• 20: Miller, G.A. & Fellbaum, C. Semantic Networks of English. In B. Devine & S. Pinker (eds.), Lexicat & Conceptual Semantics. B!ackwell, Cambridge, MA, 1991, 197-229.
• 21: Nelson, T. H. The right way to think about software design. In B. Laurel (ed.), The An of Human-Computer Interface Design. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990, 235-244.
• 22: Tim Oren, The architecture of static hypertexts, Proceeding of the ACM conference on Hypertext, p.291-306, November 1987, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States [doi>10.1145/317426.317447]
• 23: George G. Robertson , Jock D. Mackinlay , Stuart K. Card, Cone Trees: animated 3D visualizations of hierarchical information, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, p.189-194, April 27-May 02, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/108844.108883]
• 24: Rosch, E. Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (eds.), Cognition and Categorization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1978.
• 25: Smith, D. C., lrby, C., Kimball, R., Verplank, W. & Harslem, E. Designing the star interface. Byte. 7(4, 1982), 242,282.
• 26: Waller, A., Broumley, L., & Newell, A. Incorporating conversational narratives in an AAC device. Presented at ISAAC-92, Abstract in AAC- Augmentalive and Alternative Communication. 8, 1982.

INDEX TERMS

Primary 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)

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology; Theory and methods

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Languages, Theory