Touch screen performance by individuals with and without motor control disabilities

Applied Ergonomics

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 297-302

  Chen, Karen B ^a   Savage, Anne B ^a   Chourasia, Amrish O ^a   Wiegmann, Douglas A ^a,b   Sesto, Mary E ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b Wisconsin Electric Machines and Power Electronics Consortium   (United States)

Author keywords

Disability; Performance; Touch screen

Indexed keywords

ERGONOMICS; PHYSICAL THERAPY;

DISABILITY; GAP SIZE; MOTOR ABILITIES; MOTOR CONTROL; PERFORMANCE; TOUCH TECHNOLOGIES; USER PERFORMANCE;

TOUCH SCREENS;

EID: 84868091061     PISSN: 00036870     EISSN: 18729126     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2012.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aparicio P., Diedrichsen J., Ivry R.B. Effects of focal basal ganglia lesions on timing and force control. Brain Cogn. 2005, 58:62-74.
2. Astell A.J., Ellis M.P., Bernardi L., Alm N., Dye R., Gowans G., Campbell J. Using a touch screen computer to support relationships between people with dementia and caregivers. Interact Comput. 2010, 22:267-275.
3. American With Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design, 28 C.F.R. pt 36 C.F.R., 1990. U.S. Department of Justice publication (last amended, 2010), http://www.ada.gov/adastd94.pdf.
4. Bergfeldt U., Skold C., Julin P. Short Form 36 assessed health-related quality of life after focal spasticity therapy. J. Rehabil. Med. 2009, 41:279-281.
5. Berk C., Carr J., Sinden M., Martzke J., Honey C.R. Thalamic deep brain stimulation for the treatment of tremor due to multiple sclerosis: a prospective study of tremor and quality of life. J. Neurosurg. 2002, 97:815-820.
6. Boudioni M. Availability and use of information touch-screen kiosks (to facilitate social inclusion). Aslib Proc. 2003, 55:320-333.
7. Chung M.K., Kim D., Na S., Lee D. Usability evaluation of numeric entry tasks on keypad type and age. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2010, 40:97-105.
8. Colle H.A., Hiszem K.J. Standing at a kiosk: effects of key size and spacing on touch screen numeric keypad performance and user preference. Ergonomics 2004, 47:1406-1423.
9. Forlines C., Wigdor D., Shen C., Balakrishnan R. Direct-touch vs. mouse input for tabletop displays. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, California, USA 2007, 647-656.
10. Greiner T. Hand Anthropometry of U.S. Army Personnel 1991, U.S. Army Report NATICK/TR-92/011, U.S. Army Natick, Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, Massachusetts.
11. Holzinger A. Finger instead of mouse: touch screens as a means of enhancing universal access. Proceedings of the User Interfaces for All 7th International Conference on Universal Access: Theoretical Perspectives, Practice, and Experience, Paris, France 2003, 387-397.
12. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations (ANSI/HFES Standard No. 100-2007) 2007, Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, California.
13. Irwin C., Sesto M. Performance and touch characteristics of disabled and non-disabled participants during a reciprocal tapping task using touch screen technology. Appl. Ergon. 2012, 43:1038-1043.
14. ISO 9241-9 Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs) - Part 9: Requirements for Non-keyboard Input Devices 2000.
15. Jin Z., Plocher T., Kiff L. Touch screen user interfaces for older adults: button size and spacing. Universal Acess in Human Computer Interaction. Coping with Diversity 2007, 933-941. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg. C. Stephanidis (Ed.).
16. Lee D. The state of the touch-screen panel market in 2011. Inf. Disp. 2011, 27:12-16.
17. McHorney C.A., Ware J.E.J., Rachel Lu J.F., Sherbourne C.D. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med. Care 1994, 32:40-66.
18. Monterey Technologies, 1996. Resource guide for Accessibility: Design of Consumer Electronics. Draft submitted to: EIA-EIF Committee on Product Accessibility, A Joint Venture of the Electronic Industries Association and the Electronic Industries Foundation, DC 20006.
19. Murata A., Iwase H. Usability of touch-panel interfaces for older adults. Hum. Factor. 2005, 47:767-776.
20. O'Brien M.A., Rogers W., Fisk A.D., Richman M. Assessing design features of virtual keyboards for text entry. Hum. Factor. 2008, 50:680-698.
21. Schedlbauer M.J., Pastel R.L., Heines J.M. Effect of posture on target acquisition with a trackball and touch screen. 28th International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces 2006, 257-262.
22. Schedlbauer M. Effects of key size and spacing on the completion time and accuracy of input tasks on soft keypads using trackball and touch input. Proc. Hum. Fact Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2007, 51:429-433.
23. Scott B., Conzola V. Designing touch screen numeric keypads: effects of finger size, key size, and key spacing. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41th Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, California 1997, 429-433.
24. Sears A. Improving touchscreen keyboards: design issues and a comparison with other devices. Interact Comput. 1991, 3:253-269.
25. Sears A., Revis D., Swatski J., Crittenden R., Shneiderman B. Investigating touchscreen typing: the effect of keyboard size on typing speed. Behav. Inf. Technol. 1993, 12:17-22.
26. Sesto M.E., Irwin C.B., Chen K.B., Chourasia A.O., Wiegmann D.A. Effect of touch screen button size and spacing on disabled and non-disabled user touch characteristics. Hum. Factor. 2012, 54:425-436.
27. Shervin N., Dorrwachter J., Bragdon C.R., Shervin D., Zurakowski D., Malchau H. Comparison of paper and computer-based questionnaire modes for measuring health outcomes in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 2011, 93-A:285-293.
28. Shin G., Zhu X. User discomfort, work posture and muscle activity while using a touchscreen in a desktop PC setting. Ergonomics 2011, 54:733-744.
29. van Roon D., Steenbergen B., Hulstijn W. Reciprocal tapping in spastic hemiparesis. Clin. Rehabil. 2000, 14:592-600.
30. Ware J.E., Gandek B. Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the international quality of life assessment (IQOLA) project. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1998, 51:903-912.