The original paper is in English. Non-English content has been machine-translated and may contain typographical errors or mistranslations. ex. Some numerals are expressed as "XNUMX".
Copyrights notice
The original paper is in English. Non-English content has been machine-translated and may contain typographical errors or mistranslations. Copyrights notice
Embora a investigação em interfaces multimodais já exista há muito tempo, acreditamos que algumas questões básicas ainda não foram estudadas, por exemplo, a escolha das modalidades e suas combinações é geralmente feita sem qualquer avaliação quantitativa. Este estudo busca identificar as melhores combinações de modalidades por meio de testes de usabilidade. Como os usuários escolhem diferentes modos de interação quando trabalham em um aplicativo específico? Duas avaliações experimentais foram realizadas para comparar modos de interação em um sistema CAD e um sistema de mapas, respectivamente. Para o sistema CAD, os resultados mostram que, em termos de tempo total de manipulação (tempo de desenho e modificação) e preferências subjetivas, a combinação “caneta + fala + mouse” foi a melhor dos sete modos de interação testados. No sistema de mapas, os resultados mostram que o modo de combinação “caneta + fala” é o melhor dos quatorze modos de interação testados. Os experimentos também fornecem informações sobre como os usuários se adaptam a cada modo de interação e a facilidade com que conseguem utilizar esses modos.
The copyright of the original papers published on this site belongs to IEICE. Unauthorized use of the original or translated papers is prohibited. See IEICE Provisions on Copyright for details.
Copiar
Xiangshi REN, Gao ZHANG, Guozhong DAI, "The Efficiency of Various Multimodal Input Interfaces Evaluated in Two Empirical Studies" in IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information,
vol. E84-D, no. 10, pp. 1421-1426, October 2001, doi: .
Abstract: Although research into multimodal interfaces has been around for a long time, we believe that some basic issues have not been studied yet, e.g. the choice of modalities and their combinations is usually made without any quantitative evaluation. This study seeks to identify the best combinations of modalities through usability testing. How do users choose different interaction modes when they work on a particular application? Two experimental evaluations were conducted to compare interaction modes on a CAD system and a map system respectively. For the CAD system, the results show that, in terms of total manipulation time (drawing and modification time) and subjective preferences, the "pen + speech + mouse" combination was the best of the seven interaction modes tested. On the map system, the results show that the "pen + speech" combination mode is the best of fourteen interaction modes tested. The experiments also provide information on how users adapt to each interaction mode and the ease with which they are able to use these modes.
URL: https://global.ieice.org/en_transactions/information/10.1587/e84-d_10_1421/_p
Copiar
@ARTICLE{e84-d_10_1421,
author={Xiangshi REN, Gao ZHANG, Guozhong DAI, },
journal={IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information},
title={The Efficiency of Various Multimodal Input Interfaces Evaluated in Two Empirical Studies},
year={2001},
volume={E84-D},
number={10},
pages={1421-1426},
abstract={Although research into multimodal interfaces has been around for a long time, we believe that some basic issues have not been studied yet, e.g. the choice of modalities and their combinations is usually made without any quantitative evaluation. This study seeks to identify the best combinations of modalities through usability testing. How do users choose different interaction modes when they work on a particular application? Two experimental evaluations were conducted to compare interaction modes on a CAD system and a map system respectively. For the CAD system, the results show that, in terms of total manipulation time (drawing and modification time) and subjective preferences, the "pen + speech + mouse" combination was the best of the seven interaction modes tested. On the map system, the results show that the "pen + speech" combination mode is the best of fourteen interaction modes tested. The experiments also provide information on how users adapt to each interaction mode and the ease with which they are able to use these modes.},
keywords={},
doi={},
ISSN={},
month={October},}
Copiar
TY - JOUR
TI - The Efficiency of Various Multimodal Input Interfaces Evaluated in Two Empirical Studies
T2 - IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information
SP - 1421
EP - 1426
AU - Xiangshi REN
AU - Gao ZHANG
AU - Guozhong DAI
PY - 2001
DO -
JO - IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information
SN -
VL - E84-D
IS - 10
JA - IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information
Y1 - October 2001
AB - Although research into multimodal interfaces has been around for a long time, we believe that some basic issues have not been studied yet, e.g. the choice of modalities and their combinations is usually made without any quantitative evaluation. This study seeks to identify the best combinations of modalities through usability testing. How do users choose different interaction modes when they work on a particular application? Two experimental evaluations were conducted to compare interaction modes on a CAD system and a map system respectively. For the CAD system, the results show that, in terms of total manipulation time (drawing and modification time) and subjective preferences, the "pen + speech + mouse" combination was the best of the seven interaction modes tested. On the map system, the results show that the "pen + speech" combination mode is the best of fourteen interaction modes tested. The experiments also provide information on how users adapt to each interaction mode and the ease with which they are able to use these modes.
ER -