Advertisement

A Simple Method to Record Keystrokes on Mobile Phones and Other Devices for Usability Evaluations

  • Brian T. LinEmail author
  • Paul A. Green
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9746)

Abstract

Task times, sometimes at the keystroke level, as well as the number of keystrokes are often used to assess the usefulness and ease of use of mobile devices. This paper describes a new method to obtain keystroke-level timing of tasks involving Virtual Network Computing (VNC) and Techsmith Morae (commonly used for usability tests). Running VNC, the PC mimics what the mobile device does, which is recorded by Morae running on the PC. To evaluate this configuration, 24 pairs of subjects texted 1,200 messages concerning five topics to each other. Every keystroke was recorded and timed to the nearest 10 ms. As desired, the communications were quite stable, with times of 90 % of the messages on the two recording computers being normally distributed and within ± 100 ms of each other. Others are encouraged to use this method, given its accuracy and low cost, to examine mobile device usability.

Keywords

Keystroke-logging Usability testing Mobile devices Virtual network computing (VNC) 

References

  1. 1.
    Hornbæk, K., Law, E.L.-C.: Meta-analysis of correlations among usability measures. Paper presented at the CHI 2007 Proceedings, San Jose, CA, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kjeldskov, J., Stage, J.: New techniques for usability evaluation of mobile systems. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 60(5), 599–620 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Klockar, T., Carr, D.A., Hedman, A., Johansson, T., Bengtsson, F.: Usability of mobile phones. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Human Factors in Telecommunication, Berlin, Germany (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Silfverberg, M., MacKenzie, S., Korhonen, P.: Predicting text entry speed on mobile phones. Paper presented at the CHI 2000, The Hague, The Netherlands (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kukreja, U., Stevenson, W.E., Ritter, F.E.: RUI: recording user input from interfaces under Windows and Mac OS X. Behav. Res. Meth. 38(4), 656–659 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacKenzie, S., Kober, H., Smith, D., Jones, T., Skepner, E.: LetterWise: prefix-based disambiguation for mobile text input. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Orlando, FL, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Edmonds, A.: Uzilla: a new tool for web usability testing. Behav. Res. Meth., Instrum. Comput. 35(2), 194–201 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holleis, P., Otto, F., Huβmann, H., Schmidt, A.: Keystroke-level model for advanced mobile phone interaction. Paper presented at the CHI 2007 Proceedings, San Jose, CA, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Keller, F., Gunasekharan, S., Mayo, N., Corley, M.: Timing accuracy of web experiments: a case study using the WebExp software package. Behav. Res. Meth. 41(1), 1–12 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wengelin, Å., Torrance, M., Holmqvist, K., Simpson, S., Galbraith, D., Johansson, V., Johansson, R.: Combined eyetracking and keystroke-logging methods for studying cognitive processes in text production. Behav. Res. Meth. 41(2), 337–351 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Betiol, A.H., de Abreu Cybis, W.: Usability testing of mobile devices: a comparison of three approaches. In: Costabile, M.F., Paternó, F. (eds.) INTERACT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3585, pp. 470–481. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gupta, A., Cozza, R., Milanesi, C., Lu, C.: Market Share Analysis: Mobile Phones, Worldwide, 4Q12 and 2012: Gartner, Inc. (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Green, P., Lin, B., Kang, T.-P., Best, A.: Manual and Speech Entry of Text Messages while Driving. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), Ann Arbor (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hecht, R.M., Tzirkel, E., Tsimhoni, O.: Language models for text messaging based on driving workload. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, San Francisco, CA, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Winter, U., Grost, T.J., Tsimhoni, O.: Language pattern aanalysis for automotive natural language speech applications. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Pittsburgh, PA, USA (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Winter, U., Ben-Aharon, R., Chernobrov, D., Hecht, R.M.: Topics as contextual indicators for word choice in sms conversations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2011: The 12th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, Portland, OR, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thomas, E.A.C., Jones, R.G.: A model for subjective grouping in typewriting. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 22(3), 353–367 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cooper, W.E.: Cognitive Aspects of Skilled Typewriting. Springer, New York (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Austin, D., Jimison, H., Hayes, T., Mattek, N., Kaye, J., Pavel, M.: Measuring motor speed through typing: a surrogate for the finger tapping test. Behav. Res. Meth. 43(4), 903–909 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eichstaedt, J.: An inaccurate-timing filter for reaction time measurement by JAVA applets implementing internet-based experiments. Behav. Res. Meth. Instrum. Comput. 33(2), 179–186 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Driver Interface GroupUniversity of Michigan Transportation Research InstituteAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations