Effects of angle of approach on cursor movement with a mouse: Consideration of Fitts' law

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 481-495

  Whisenand, Thomas G ^a   Emurian, Henry H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; DISPLAY DEVICES; GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES; INTERACTIVE DEVICES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; USER INTERFACES;

ANGLE OF APPROACH; COMPUTER DISPLAY SCREEN; CURSOR MOVEMENT; FITTS LAW; HUMAN MOTOR MOVEMENTS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 0030242026     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0747-5632(96)00020-9     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Baccino, T., & Kennedy, A. (1995). MICELAB: Spatial processing of mouse movement in turbo pascal. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 27, 76-82.
2. Boritz, J., Booth, K. S., & Cowan, W. B. (1991). Fitts' law studies of directional mouse movement. Proceedings of the Graphical Interface Conference, 216-223.
3. Card, S. K., English, W. K., & Burr, B. J. (1978). Evaluation of mouse, rate-controlled isometric joystick, step keys, and text keys for text selection on a CRT. Ergonomics, 21, 601-613.
4. Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Robertson, G. G. (1991). A morphological analysis of the design space of input devices. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 9, 99-122.
5. Crossman, E. R. F. W. (1960). The information capacity of the human motor system in pursuit tracking. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 12, 1-16.
6. English, W. K., Engelbart, D. C., & Berman, M. L. (1967). Display-selection techniques for text manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-8(1), 5-15.
7. Epps, B. W. (1986). Comparison of six cursor control devices based on Fitts' law models. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA, 327-331.
8. Epps, B. W., Snyder, H. L., & Muto, W. H. (1986). Comparison of six cursor control devices on a target acquisition task. Proceedings of the Society for Information Display, 302-305.
9. Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.
10. Gan, K., & Hoffman, E. R. (1988). Geometrical conditions for ballistic and visually controlled movements. Ergonomics, 31, 829-839.
11. Gillan, D. J., Holden, K., Adam, S., Rudisill, M., & Magee, L. (1992). How should Fitts' law be applied to human-computer interaction? Interacting with Computers, 4, 291-313.
12. Green, A. J. K., & Barnard, P. J. (1990). Iconic interfacing: The role of icon distinctiveness and fixed or variable screen locations. Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT '90, 457-462.
13. Greenstein, J. S., & Arnaut, L. Y. (1988). Input devices. In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of human computer interaction (pp. 495-519). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
14. Hoffmann, E. R., & Sheikh, I. H. (1994). Effect of varying target height in a Fitts' movement task. Ergonomics, 36, 1071-1088.
15. Jones, T. (1991). An empirical study of children's use of computer pointing devices. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7, 61-76.
16. Karat, J., McDonald, J. E., & Anderson, M. (1986). A comparison of menu selection techniques: touch, panel, mouse, and keyboard. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 25, 73-88.
17. Luria, S. M., Neri, D. F., & Schlichting, S. (1989). Performance and preference with various VDT phosphors. Applied Ergonomics, 20, 33-38.
18. MacKenzie, I. S. (1992). Fitts' law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction, 7, 91-139.
19. MacKenzie, I. S., & Buxton, W. (1992). Extending Fitts' law to two-dimensional tasks. Proceedings of the CHI'92 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 219-226.
20. MacKenzie, I. S., Sellen, A., & Buxton, W. (1991). A comparison of input devices in elemental pointing and dragging tasks. Proceedings of the CHI'91 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 161-166.
21. Maxwell, H. D., & Delaney, H. D. (1992). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
22. Meyer, D. E. (1988). Optimality in human motor performance: Ideal control of rapid aimed movements. Psychological Review, 95, 340-370.
23. Ostroff, D., & Shneiderman, B. (1988). Selection devices for users of an electronic encyclopedia: An empirical comparison of four possibilities. Information Processing & Management, 24, 665-680.
24. Perry, T.S., & Voelcker, J. (1989, September). Of mice and menus: Designing the user-friendly interface. IEEE Spectrum, pp. 46-51.
25. Sears, A., & Shneiderman, B. (1991). High precision touchscreens: Design strategies and comparisons with a mouse. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 593-613.
26. Sheikh, I. H., & Hoffmann, E. R. (1994). Effect of target shape on movement time in a Fitts task. Ergonomics, 37, 1533-1547.
27. Welford, A. T. (1960). The measurement of sensory-motor performance: Survey and reappraisal of twelve years' progress. Ergonomics, 3, 189-230.