Design and validation of virtually multiple mouse wheels

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 392-401

  Lee, Kuo Wei ^a   Lee, Ying Chu ^b  

^a SOUTHERN TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b CHUNG YUAN CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Capacitive touch sensors; Mouse; Mouse wheel

Indexed keywords

AUXILIARY SIGNALS; MOUSE CLICKS; MOUSE WHEEL; MULTIPLE MOUSE; OPERATING SOFTWARE; OPERATION EFFICIENCIES; SOFTWARE FUNCTIONS; TOOLBARS; TOUCH SENSORS; VIRTUAL WHEEL;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; CONTACT SENSORS; DESIGN; VEHICLES;

WHEELS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER MOUSE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SYSTEM; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRONIC SENSOR; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMAN; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; JOB PERFORMANCE; MALE; OBJECT MANIPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; RELIABILITY; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; TASK PERFORMANCE; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EID: 77953083239     PISSN: 01698141     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2010.03.004     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Aaras A., Fostervold K., Ro O., Thorenson M., Larsen S. Postural load during VDU work: a comparison between various work postures. Ergonomics 1997, 40(11):1255-1268.
2. Agarwal R., Karahanna E. Time flies when you're having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly 2000, 24(4):665-694.
3. Akamatsu M., Mackenzie I.S. Changes in applied force to a touchpad during pointing tasks. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2002, 29:171-182.
4. Atkinson P. The best laid plans of mice and men: the computer mouse in the history of computing. Design Issues 2007, 23(3):46-61.
5. Blackstone J.M., Karr C., Camp C., Johnson P. Physical exposure differences between children and adults when using standard and small computer input devices. Ergonomics 2008, 51(6):872-889.
6. Bystrom J.U., Hansson G.-A., Rylander L., Ohlsson K., Kallrot G., Skerfving S. Physical workload on neck and upper limb using two CAD applications. Applied Ergonomics 2002, 33(1):63-74.
7. Chau P.Y.K., Hu P.J.H. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: a model comparison approach. Decision Sciences 2001, 32(4):699-719.
8. Chen H.C., Wu H.C., Liu Y.P. Design and functional evaluation of a novel external logger for computer input activities. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2009, 39(5):790-797.
9. Cook C., Burgess-Limerick R., Chang S. The prevalence of neck and upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms in computer mouse users. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2000, 26(3):347-356.
10. Dang N.T., Tavanti M., Rankin I., Cooper M. A comparison of different input devices for a 3D environment. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2009, 39(3):554-563.
11. Davis, F.D., 1986. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information System: Theory and Results. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.
12. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1989, 13(3):319-340.
13. De Korte E.M., De Kraker H., Bongers P.M., Van Lingen P. Effects of a feedback signal in a computer mouse on movement behaviour, muscle load, productivity, comfort and user friendliness. Ergonomics 2008, 51(11):1757-1775.
14. Flodgren G., Heiden M., Lyskov E., Crenshaw A.G. Characterization of a laboratory model of computer mouse use: applications for studying risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders. Applied Ergonomics 2007, 38(2):213-218.
15. Fogleman M., Brogmus G. Computer mouse use and cumulative trauma disorders of the upper extremities. Ergonomics 1995, 38(12):2465-2475.
16. Houwink A., Oude Hengel K.M., Odell D., Dennerlein J.T. Providing training enhances the biomechanical improvements of an alternative computer mouse design. Human Factors 2009, 51(1):46-55.
17. Hwang Y.H., Wang C.H., Liang H.W., Luh J.J. Validation of a recording system for computer pointing device activity. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2009, 39(5):681-688.
18. Johnson, P., Dropkin, J., Hews, J., Rempel, D., 1993. Office ergonomics: motion analysis of computer mouse usage. In: Proceedings of the American Industrial Hygiene Conference and Exposition, Fairfax, Virginia, pp. 12-13.
19. Kerlinger F.N. Formation of Behavior Research 1986, Holt, Rinchart and Winston Inc., Chicago. third ed.
20. Kim S.H., Kaber D.B. Design and evaluation of dynamic text-editing methods using foot pedals. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2009, 39(2):358-365.
21. Kraker H.De, Korte E.M., Van Mil F.L., Rijs B.P., Bongers P.M. The effect of a feedback signal in a computer mouse on hovering behaviour, productivity, comfort and usability in a field study. Ergonomics 2008, 51(2):140-155.
22. Kotani K., Horii K. A fundamental study on pointing force applied to the mouse in relation to approaching angles and the index of difficulty. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2001, 28(3):189-195.
23. Lee K.C.I., Kim J.S. Exploring the user interface of negotiation support systems from the user acceptance perspective. Computers in Human Behavior 2007, 23(1):220-239.
24. Lin A. The acceptance and use of a business-to-business information system. International Journal of Information Management 2006, 26(5):386-400.
25. Lee D.L., McLoone H., Dennerlein J.T. Observed finger behavior during computer mouse use. Applied Ergonomics 2008, 39(1):107-113.
26. Lu X., Toivonen R., Takala E.P. Exploring time-dependent symptom outcomes in office staff. Human Factors in Ergonomics & Manufacturing 2009, 19(3):241-253.
27. Luarn P., Lin H.H. Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking. Computers in Human Behavior 2005, 21(6):873-891.
28. Nunnally J. Psychometric Theory 1978, McGraw-Hill, New York. second ed.
29. Park J., Han S.H., Yang H. Evaluation of cursor capturing functions in a target positioning task. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2006, 36(8):721-730.
30. Porta M. Vision-based user interfaces: methods and application. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2002, 57:27-73.
31. Robertson M., Amick B.C., DeRango K., Rooney T., Bazzani L., Harrist R., Moore A. The effects of an office ergonomics training and chair intervention on worker knowledge, behavior and musculoskeletal risk. Applied Ergonomics 2009, 40(1):124-135.
32. Straker, L., Pollock, C., Frosh, A., Aaras, A., Dainoff, M., 2000. An ergonomic field comparison of a traditional computer mouse and a vertical computer mouse in uninjured office workers. Ergonomics for the New Millennium. In: Proceedings of the XIVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, San Diego, CA, July 29-August 4, pp. 6356-6359.
33. Straub D., Keil M., Brenner W. Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: a three country study. Information & Management 1997, 33:1-11.
34. Toomingas A., Gavhed D. Workstation layout and work postures at call centres in Sweden in relation to national law, EU-directives and ISO-standards, and to operators' comfort and symptoms. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 2008, 38(11-12):1051-1061.
35. Heijden H.V.D. Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in the Netherlands. Information & Management 2003, 40(6):541-549.
36. Wahlstrom J., Svensson J., Hagberg M., Johnson P.W. Differences between work methods and gender in computer mouse use. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health 2000, 26:390-397.
37. Wu I.L., Chen J.L. An extension of trust and TAM model with TPB in the initial adoption of on-line tax: an empirical study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2005, 62(6):784-808.
38. Yoon S.Y., Laffey J., Oh H. Understanding usability and user experience of web-based 3D graphics technology. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 2008, 24(3):288-306.