Advertisement

Anthropometrics: Important Aspects of Users’ Bodies

  • Frank E. RitterEmail author
  • Gordon D. Baxter
  • Elizabeth F. Churchill
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter addresses factors that arise from basic characteristics of the human body. While bodies vary in their size, shape, capabilities, and limitations, there are some common factors that are shared and some general guidance that we can apply to design better interfaces and systems. This is a broad topic: the influence of bodies on usability applies to all systems, and is illustrated with examples from desktop, laptop, mobile, and handheld systems. After briefly providing an overview of the issues involved, this chapter covers the importance of the physical setup for computers. We also introduce and discuss the importance of touch and tactile feedback, better known as haptic perception. Haptic perception has become increasingly important with the widespread uptake of touch screen devices and gaming interfaces. We illustrate the importance of haptic perception by considering how people interact with a wide range of devices and systems. The chapter concludes with some implications of the need to consider anthropometric factors when designing interactive systems.

Keywords

Touch Screen Haptic Feedback Haptic Device Tactile Feedback Virtual Reality System 
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.

References

  1. Bau, O., & Poupyrev, I. (2012). REVEL: Tactile feedback technology for augmented reality. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 31(4), Article 89, 1–11.Google Scholar
  2. Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1980). The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems. Communications of the ACM, 23(7), 396–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Card, S. K., Moran, T., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Dillon, P., Moody, W., Bartlett, R., Scully, P., Morgan, R., & James, C. L. (2001). Sensing the fabric: To simulate sensation through sensory evaluation and in response to standard acceptable properties of specific materials when viewed as a digital image. In Haptic human-computer interaction, First international workshop (pp. 205–218). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. English, J., & Andre, A. D. (1999). Posture and web browsing: An observational study. In Proceedings of the 43rd annual meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 945–949). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google Scholar
  6. Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47(6), 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fogtmann, M. H., Fristch, J., & Kortbek, K. J. (2008). Kinesthetic interaction—Revealing the bodily potential in interaction design. In OZCHI’08: Proceedings of the 20th Australasian conference on computerhuman interaction: Designing for habitus and habitat (pp. 89–96). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  9. Göbel, M., Luczak, H., Springer, J., Hedicke, V., & Rötting, M. (1995). Tactile feedback applied to computer mice. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. James, C. L., & Reischel, K. M. (2001). Text input for mobile devices: Comparing model prediction to actual performance. In CHI ‘01 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 365–371). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
  11. Jiang, Y., Tian, F., Zhang, X., Liu, W., Dai, G., & Wang, H. (2012). Unistroke gestures on multi-touch interaction: Supporting flexible touches with key stroke extraction. In ACM conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) (pp. 61–70). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
  12. John, B. E. (1996). TYPIST: A theory of performance in skilled typing. Human-Computer Interaction, 11(4), 321–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaczmarek, K. A., & Bach-y-Rita, P. (1995). Tactile displays. In W. Barfield & T. A. Furness III (Eds.), Virtual environments and advanced interface design (pp. 349–414). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kinkead, R. (1975). Typing speed, keying rates, and optimal keyboard layouts. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 19th annual meeting (pp. 159–161). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.Google Scholar
  15. Landauer, T. K. (1987a). Relations between cognitive psychology and computer systems design. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), lnterfacing thought: Cognitive aspects of human- computer interaction (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Landauer, T. K. (1987b). Relations between cognitive psychology and computer systems design. In J. Preece & L. Keller (Eds.), Human-computer interaction (pp. 141–159). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  17. Loomis, J. M., & Lederman, S. J. (1986). Tactual perception. In K. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. II, pp. 31-31–31-41). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. MacKenzie, I. S., & Buxton, W. A. S. (1992). Extending Fitts’ law to two-dimensional tasks. In Proceedings of ACM CHI 1992 conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 219–226).Google Scholar
  19. MacKenzie, I. S., & Soukoreff, R. W. (2002). Text entry for mobile computing: Models and methods, theory and practice. Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 147–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  22. Park, Y. W., Baek, K. M., & Nam, T. J. (2013). The roles of touch during phone conversations: Long-distance couples’ use of POKE in their homes. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM annual conference on human factors in computing systems, (pp. 1679–1688). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
  23. Salthouse, T. A. (1986). Perceptual, cognitive, and motoric aspects of transcription typing. Psychological Bulletin, 3(3), 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423; 623–656.Google Scholar
  25. Tian, F., Xu, L., Wang, H., Zhang, X., Liu, Y., Setlur, V., et al. (2008). Tilt Menu: Using the 3D orientation information of pen devices to extend the selection capability of pen-based user. In ACM SIGCHI annual conference (CHI) 2008, (pp. 1371–1380). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
  26. Wickens, C. D., Gordon, S. E., & Liu, Y. (1998). An introduction to human factors engineering. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  27. Zonta, N., Grimstead, I. J., Avis, N. J., & Brancale, A. (2009). Accessible haptic technology for drug design applications. Journal of Molecular Modeling, 15(2), 193–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank E. Ritter
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gordon D. Baxter
    • 2
  • Elizabeth F. Churchill
    • 3
  1. 1.College of ISTThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsUK
  3. 3.eBay Research LabsSan JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations