ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Cursor movement during text editing
Full text PdfPdf (1.04 MB)
Source ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) archive
Volume 3 ,  Issue 1  (January 1985) table of contents
Pages: 22 - 34  
Year of Publication: 1985
ISSN:1046-8188
Authors
John D. Gould  IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY
Clayton Lewis  IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY
Vincent Barnes  IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 21,   Citation Count: 5
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   review   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/10.1145/3864.3867
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Nine participants used a full-screen computer text editor (XEDIT) with an IBM 3277 terminal to edit marked-up documents at each of three cursor speeds (3.3, 4.7, and 11.0 cm/s). These speeds occur when a user continuously holds down an arrow key to move the cursor more than one character position (i.e., in repeat or typamatic mode). Results show that cursor speed did not seem to act as a pacing device for the entire editing task. Since cursor speed is a form of system response, this finding is in contrast with the generally found positive relation between system-response time and user-response time. Participants preferred the Fast cursor speed, however. Overall, more than one-third of all keystrokes were used to move the cursor. We estimate that 9-14 percent of editing time was spent controlling and moving the cursor, regardless of cursor speed.


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
ALLEN, R.B. Patterns of manuscript revisions. Behav. In{. Technol. 1, 2 (1982), 177-184.
 
2
BOLES, S.J. User behavior on an interactive computer system. IBM Syst. J. 13 (1974), 2-18.
 
3
CARD, S. K., ENGLISH, W. K., AND BURR, S. Evaluation of mouse, rate-controlled isometric joystick, step keys, and text keys for text selection on a CRT. Tech. Rep. SSL-77-1, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, Calif, 1977.
4
 
5
DEVOE, D.B. Alternatives to handprinting in the manual entry of data. IEEE Trans. HFE-8 (1967), 21-32.
 
6
DOHERTY, W. J., AND KELISKY, R.P. Managing VM/CMS system for user effectiveness. IBM Syst. J. 18, 1 (1979), 143-163.
 
7
DOHERTY, W. J., AND THADHANI, A.J. The economic value of rapid response time. IBM Tech. Rep. GE20-0752-0, 1982. (Available from the author at IBM Research, Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598.)
 
8
GOULD, J. D., AND ALFARO, L. Revising documents with text editors, handwriting recognition, and speech recognition systems. Hum. Factors 26 (1984), 391-406.
9



REVIEW

"Myril Clement Shaw : Reviewer","Susan Soltis Shaw : Reviewer"

Gould, Lewis, and Barnes have attempted to measure the role and result of cursor movement speed in text editing. Their basic findings are as follows: (1) between 9 and 14 percent of editing task time is spent moving and controlling the cursor; (  more...

Collaborative Colleagues:
John D. Gould: colleagues
Clayton Lewis: colleagues
Vincent Barnes: colleagues