Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring acceptable input: What is “good enough”?

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many new assistive input systems developed to meet the needs of users with functional impairments fail to make it out of the research laboratory and into regular use by the intended end users. This paper examines some of the reasons for this failure and focuses particularly on whether the developers of such systems are using the correct metrics and approaches for evaluating the functional and social attributes of the input systems they are designing. This paper further focuses on the importance of benchmarking new assistive input systems against baseline measures of useful interaction rates that take allowance of factors such as input success/recognition rate, error rate, correction effort and input time. By addressing each of these measures, a more complete understanding of whether an input system is practically and functionally acceptable can be obtained, and design guidance for developers is provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Polacek, O., Sporka, A.J., Slavik, P.: Text input for motor-impaired people. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (Springer online first) (2015)

  2. Nicolau, H., Guerreiro, T., Lucas, D., Jorge, J.: Mobile text-entry and visual demands: reusing and optimizing current solutions. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 13(3), 291–301 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Paradise, J., Trewin, S., Keates, S.: Using pointing devices: difficulties encountered and strategies employed. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 22–27. Las Vegas, NV (2005)

  4. Keates, S., Trewin, S.: Effects of age and Parkinson’s disease on cursor positioning using a mouse. In: Proceedings of 7th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS 2005), pp. 68–75. Baltimore, MD (2005)

  5. Stephanidis, C., Savidis, A.: Universal access in the information society: methods, tools, and interaction technologies. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 1(1), 40–55 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Begnum, M.E.N., Begnum, K.: On the usefulness of off-the-shelf computer peripherals for people with Parkinson’s Disease. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 11(4), 347–357 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rodrigues, E., Carreira, M., Goncalves, D.: Enhancing typing performance of older adults on tablets. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (Springer Online First) (2014). doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0394-8

  8. Keates, S., Potter, R., Perricos, C., Robinson, P.: Gesture recognition—research and clinical perspectives. In: Proceedings of RESNA 97, pp. 333–335. Pittsburgh, PA (1997)

  9. Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Mourouzis, A., Antona, M., Stephandis, C.: A diversity-sensitive evaluation method. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 10(3), 337–356 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Keates, S.: Designing for Accessibility: A Business Guide to Countering Design Exclusion. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Buhler, C.: Robotics for rehabilitation—a European (?) perspective. Robotica 16(5), 487–490 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tsourakis, N.: Using hand gestures to control mobile spoken dialogue systems. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 13(3), 257–275 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A.: The Psychology of Human–Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J.: Countering design exclusion: bridging the gap between usability and accessibility. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2(3), 215–225 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Freedom Scientific: JAWS for windows: screen reading software. http://www.freedomscientific.com/Products/Blindness/JAWS (2014)

  17. Keates, S., Adams, R., Bodine, C., Czaja, S., Gordon, W., Gregor, P., Hacker, E., Hanson, V., Kemp, J., Laff, M., Lewis, C., Pieper, M., Richards, J., Rose, D., Savidis, A., Schultz, G., Snayd, P., Trewin, S., Varker, P.: Cognitive and learning difficulties and how they affect access to IT systems. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 5(4), 329–339 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gregor, P., Dickinson, A.: Cognitive difficulties and access to information systems: an interaction design perspective. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 5(4), 393–400 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. El, K., Robinson, P., Keates, S.: Temporal context and the recognition of emotion from facial expression. In: Proceedings of HCI International 2003, pp. 631–635. , Crete, Greece (2003)

  20. Keates, S., Varker, P., Spowart, F.: Human-machine design considerations in advanced machine-learning systems. IEEE/IBM J. Res. Dev. IEEE 55(5), 4:1–4:10 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Welton, T., Brown, D.J., Evett, L., Sherkat, N.: A brain-computer interface for the Dasher alternative text entry system. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (Springer online first) (2015)

  22. Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J.: Movement time for motion-impaired users assisted by force-feedback: effects of movement amplitude, target width, and gravity well width. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 4(2), 85–95 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Trewin, S., Keates, S., Moffatt, K.: Individual responses to the Steady Clicks cursor assistance technique. Disability and rehabilitation: assistive technology. Informa Healthc. 3(1&2), 2–21 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sandnes, F.E., Tan, T.B., Johansen, A., Sulic, E., Vesterhus, E., Iversen, E.R.: Making touch-based kiosks accessible to blind users through simple gestures. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 11(4), 421–431 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Keates, S.: A pedagogical example of teaching Universal Access. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 14(1), 97–110 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. International Standard Organization (ISO): ISO 9241-11: ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), Part 11: Guidance on Usability Specification and Measures. Technical report. ISO, Geneva (1998)

  27. Frokjaer, E., Hertzum, M., Hornbaek, K.: Measuring usability: Are effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction really correlated? In: Proceedings of CHI 2000, pp. 345–352. The Hague, NL (2000)

  28. Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J.: Countering Design Exclusion: An Introduction to Inclusive Design. Springer, London (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Jastrzembski, T., Charness, N., Holley, P., Feddon, J.: Input devices for web browsing: age and hand effects. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 4(1), 39–45 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Trewin, S., Pain, H.: Keyboard and mouse errors due to motor disabilities. Int J of Hum. Comput. Stud. 50(2), 109–144 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hu, R., Feng, J., Lazar, J., Kumin, L.: Investigating input technologies for children and young adults with Down syndrome. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 12(1), 89–104 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. MacKenzie, I.S., Soukeroff, R.W.: A character level error analysis technique for evaluating text entry methods. In: Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Human–Computer Interaction (NordiCHI’02), ACM, pp. 243–246 (2002)

  33. Soukoreff, R.W., MacKenzie, I.S.: Metrics for text entry research: an evaluation of MSD and KSPC, and a new unified error metric. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2003), pp. 113–120. Fort Lauderdale, FL (2003)

  34. Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J.: A submovement analysis of cursor trajectories. Behav. Inf. Technol. 24(3), 205–217 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. MacKenzie, I.S., Kauppinen, T., Silfverberg, M.: Accuracy measures for evaluating computer pointing devices. In: Proceedings of CHI 2001, pp. 9–15. Seattle, WA (2001)

  36. Keates, S., Hwang, F., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J., Robinson, P.: The use of cursor measures for motion-impaired computer users. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2(1), 18–29 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Holbert, B., Huber, M.: Design and evaluation of haptic effects for use in a computer desktop for the physically disabled. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 10(2), 165–178 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Keates, S., Robinson, P.: Gestures and multimodal input. Behav. Inf. Technol. 18(1), 36–44 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J., Robinson, P.: User models and user physical capability. User Model. User Adap. Inter. 12(2–3), 139–169 (2002). (Wolters Kluwer Publishers)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Chin, D.: Empirical evaluation of user models and user-adapted systems. User Model. User Adap. Inter. 11(1–2), 181–194 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Murphy, E., Kuber, R., McAllister, G., Strain, P., Yu, W.: An empirical investigation into the difficulties experienced by visually impaired Internet users. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 7(1), 79–91 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Palacio, R.R., Acosta, C.O., Cortez, J., Morán, A.L.: Usability perception of different video game devices in elderly users. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (Springer online first) (2015)

  43. Melo, P., Jorge, L.: Quantitative support for UX methods identification: how can multiple criteria decision making help? Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 14(2), 215–229 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Umemuro, H., Shirokane, Y.: Elderly Japanese computer users: assessing changes in usage, attitude, and skill transfer over a one-year period. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2(4), 305–314 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Heloir, A., Nunnari, F. Toward an intuitive sign language animation authoring system for the deaf. Int. J. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (Springer online first) (2015)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Greenwich, Medway Campus, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK

    Simeon Keates

Authors
  1. Simeon Keates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simeon Keates.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keates, S. Measuring acceptable input: What is “good enough”?. Univ Access Inf Soc 16, 713–723 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0498-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0498-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation