Study on Interaction Modalities Between Humans and CPS in Sociotechnical Systems

  • Stuart Chapman
  • Thomas Kirks
  • Jana Jost
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 876)


Nowadays, digitization and automation in manufacturing and logistics facilities lead to cyber-physical systems (CPS) which are interacting with one another and are able to handle complex and yet very flexible processes. Still there are many tasks, which cannot be handled by these CPS, and therefore, the human worker with his cognitive abilities plays a major role in such systems. To enhance the collaboration between CPS and human workers new forms of bidirectional interaction have to be setup and evaluated. In this paper, we analyzed the interaction methods of an automated transport vehicle (ATV). The ATV can be controlled via app on smartphones or tablets, gesture recognition using sensor wristbands or speech control. To obtain information about which interaction possibility should be used we have conducted a case study in which users had to control the ATV by all three modalities. During the evaluation, we examined the feedback of the user on the Likert-scale as well as objectionable information like task fulfillment time and error rate. These results helped us to identify the right interaction modality regarding the interaction task.


Human factors User experience Human-Robot-Interaction 



We greatly acknowledge the support of Thorsten Plewan from the Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors in Dortmund. Furthermore, we want to thank the Innovation lab Hybrid Services in Logistics, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and in the Center of Excellence for Logistics and IT funded by Ministry for innovation science and research of NRW, Germany.


  1. 1.
    Rinkenauer, G., Kretschmer, V., Kreutzfeldt, M.: Kognitive Ergonomie in der Intralogistik. In: Future Challenges in Logistics and Supply Chain Management, vol. 2. Fraunhofer IML, Dortmund (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jordan, P.W.: Pleasure with products: human factors for body, mind and soul. In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Human Factors in Product Design: Current Practice and Future Trends, pp. 206–217. Talyor and Francis, London (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Engelbrecht, A.: Fahrkomfort und Fahrspaß bei Einsatz von Fahrerassistenzsystemen, disserta Verlag (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock, P.A., Meshkati, N. (eds.) Human Mental Workload, North-Holland, pp. 139–183 (1988)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Laugwitz, B., Schrepp, M., Held, T.: Konstruktion eines Fragebogens zur Messung der User Experience von Softwareprodukten. In: Heinecke, A.M., Paul, H. (eds.) Mensch & Computer, de Gruyter, pp. 125–134 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Laugwitz, B., Held, T., Schrepp, M.: Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire. In: Symposium of the Austrian HCI and Usability Engineering Group. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yanko, J., Futoshi Naya, K.S.: Effect of shared-attention on human-robot communication. In: Proceedings of ACM/CHI 2004 Workshop Shaping Human-Robot Interaction, Understanding the Social Aspects of Intelligent Robotic Products, Vienna (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tzafestas, S.: Sociorobot World: A Guided Tour for All. Springer, Cham (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kurosu, M.: Human-computer interaction: interaction modalities and techniques. In: 15th International Conference, HCI Internation 2013, Las Vegas (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stollnberger, G., Weiss, A., Tscheligi, M.: “The harder it gets” exploring the interdependency of input modalities and task complexity in human-robot collaboration. In: RO-MAN 2013. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kamagaew, A., Stenzel, J., Nettstraeter, A., ten Hompel, M.: Concept of cellular transport systems in facility logistics. In: 5th International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA), pp. 40–45, December 2011Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rauschenberger, M., Schrepp, M., Perez-Cota, M., Olschner, S., Thomaschewski, J.: Efficient measurement of the user experience of interactive products. How to use the user experience questionnaire (UEQ) (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V.: Facial Action Coding System: A Technique for the Measurement of Facial Movement. Consulting Psychologists Press (1976)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Automation and Embedded SystemsFraunhofer Institute for Material Flow and LogisticsDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations