Drag-and-Guess: Drag-and-Drop with Prediction

  • Takeshi Nishida
  • Takeo Igarashi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4662)


Drag-and-guess is an extension of drag-and-drop that uses predictions which is based on application specific knowledge. As the user begins to drag an object, the system predicts the drop target and presents the result to the user. When the target is hidden in a closed folder or beneath other windows, the system makes it temporarily visible. This frees users from manual preparation such as expanding a folder tree or uncovering the target location. The user can accept the prediction by throwing the object, which then flies to the target. Or, if the prediction is unsatisfactory, the user can ignore it and perform the operation as usual. We built three prototype applications (email client, spreadsheet and overlapping windows) to show that DnG is useful in many applications. Results of the user study show that the proposed technique can improve task performance when the task is difficult to complete manually and reasonable prediction algorithm is available.


Target Location User Study Prediction Algorithm Interaction Technique Editing Operation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Rekimoto, J.: Pick-and-drop: a direct manipulation technique for multiple computer environments. In: Proc. UIST 1997, pp. 31–39. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rekimoto, J., Saitoh, M.: Augmented surfaces: a spatially continuous work space for hybrid computing environments. In: Proc. CHI 1999, pp. 378–385. ACM Press, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baudisch, P., Cutrell, E., Robbins, D., Czerwinski, M., Tandler, P., Bederson, B., Zierlinger, A.: Drag-and-pop and drag-and-pick: techniques for accessing remote screen content on touch- and pen-operated systems. In: Proc. INTERACT 2003, pp. 57–64 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Worden, A., Walker, N., Bharat, K., Hudson, S.: Making computers easier for older adults to use: area cursors and sticky icons. In: Proc. CHI 1997, pp. 266–271. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grossman, T., Balakrishnan, R.: The bubble cursor: enhancing target acquisition by dynamic resizing of the cursor’s activation area. In: Proc. CHI 2005, pp. 281–290. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blanch, R., Guiard, Y., Beaudouin-Lafon, M.: Semantic pointing: improving target acquisition with control-display ratio adaptation. In: Proc. CHI 2004, pp. 519–526. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Asano, T., Sharlin, E., Kitamura, Y., Takashima, K., Kishino, F.: Predictive interaction using the delphian desktop. In: Proc. UIST 2005, pp. 133–141. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dragicevic, P.: Combining crossing-based and paper-based interaction paradigms for dragging and dropping between overlapping windows. In: Proc. UIST 2004, pp. 193–196. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cypher, A.: Eager: programming repetitive tasks by example. In: Proc. CHI 1991, pp. 33–39. ACM Press, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Masui, T., Nakayama, K.: Repeat and predict: two keys to efficient text editing. In: Proc. CHI 1994, pp. 118–130. ACM Press, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jul, S.: Predictive targeted movement in electronic spaces. In: CHI 02 Extended Abstracts, pp. 626–627. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dulberg, M.S., Amant, R.S., Zettlemoyer, L.S.: An imprecise mouse gesture for the fast activation of controls. In: Proc. Interact 1999, pp. 375–382 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Segal, R., Kephart, J.: Mailcat: an intelligent assistant for organizing e-mail. In: Proc. AGENTS 1999, pp. 276–282 (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sugiura, A.: A web browsing interface for small-screen computers. In: CHI 1999 Extended Abstracts, pp. 216–217. ACM Press, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Robertson, G., Czerwinski, M., Larson, K., Robbins, D., Thiel, D., van Dantzich, M.: Data mountain: using spatial memory for document management. In: Proc. UIST 1998, pp. 153–162. ACM Press, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Whittaker, S., Sidner, C.: Email overload: exploring personal information management of email. In: Proc. CHI 1996, pp. 276–283. ACM Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McGuffin, M., Davison, G., Balakrishnan, R.: Expand-ahead: a space-filling strategy for browsing trees. In: Proc. INFOVIS 2004, pp. 119–126 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hendry, D.: Display-based problems in spreadsheets: a critical incident and a design remedy. In: Proc. Visual Languages 1995, pp. 284–290 (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maulsby, D., Witten, I., Kittlitz, K.: Metamouse: specifying graphical procedures by example. In: Proc. SIGGRAPH 89, pp. 127–136. ACM Press, New York (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ishak, E.W., Feiner, S.K.: Interacting with hidden content using content-aware free-space transparency. In: Proc. UIST 2004, pp. 189–192. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Accot, J., Zhai, S.: Refining fitts’ law models for bivariate pointing. In: Proc. CHI 2003, pp. 193–200. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moscovich, T., Hughes, J.F.: Navigating documents with the virtual scroll ring. In: Proc. UIST 2004, pp. 57–60. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takeshi Nishida
    • 1
  • Takeo Igarashi
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, The University of TokyoJapan
  2. 2.JST PrestoJapan

Personalised recommendations