Optimal Scroll Method for Eye-Gaze Input System

Comparison of R-E and R-S Compatibility
  • Atsuo MurataEmail author
  • Makoto Moriwaka
  • Yusuke Takagishi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9170)


It is not clear which of the R-E and the S-R compatibility principles is proper for the eye-gaze input. This issue should be addressed for the development of more usable eye-gaze input system. The aim of this study was to explore which of the two compatibility principles was proper for the eye-gaze input system. For all scroll methods, the task completion time did not differ between R-E and S-R compatibility conditions (see Fig. 4). In other words, the speed of scroll did not differ between two compatibility conditions for all of three scroll methods. The number of errors per 90 trials significantly differed among scroll conditions and between R-E and S-R compatibility conditions. Judging from the accuracy of scroll, the error was less when the S-R compatibility like non-touch screen Microsoft Windows was applied than when the R-E compatibility like iPod or iPad was applied. In the range of this study, it seems that the S-R compatibility is dominant from the viewpoints of scroll accuracy for all of three scroll methods. The subjective rating on both usability and fatigue also supported the superiority of S-R compatibility over the R-E compatibility condition. In conclusion, the S-R compatibility was found to be superior for the eye-gaze input system.


Eye-gaze input Scroll Auto scroll Scroll icon S-R compatibility R-E compatibility 


  1. 1.
    Jacob, R.J.K., Sibert, L.E., Mcfarlanes, D.C., Mullen, M.P.: Integrality and reparability of input devices. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Inter. 1(1), 2–26 (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sibert, L.E., Jacob, R.J.K.: Evaluation of eye gaze interaction. In: CHI 2000, pp. 281–288. Hague (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Murata, A.: Eye-gaze input versus mouse: cursor control as a function of age. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Inter. 21, 1–14 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murata, A., Moriwaka, M.: Effectiveness of the menu selection method for eye-gaze input system - comparison between young and older adults. In: 5th International Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Applications, pp. 306–311. Hiroshima (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Murata, A., Miyake, T.: Effectiveness of eye-gaze input system - identification of conditions that assures high pointing accuracy and movement directional effect. In: 4th International Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Applications, pp. 127–132. Hiroshima (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Murata, A., Moriwaka, M.: Basic study for development of web browser suitable for eye-gaze input system -identification of optimal click method. In: 5th International Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Applications, pp. 302–305. Hiroshima (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murata, A., Hayashi, K., Moriwaka, M., Hayami, T.: Optimal scroll method to browse web pages using an eye-gaze input system. In: AHFE2012, pp. 7106–7115. San Francisco (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murata, A., Uetsugi, R., Hayami, T.: Study on cursor shape suitable for eye-gaze input system. In: SICE2012, pp. 926–931. Akita (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murata, A., Hayashi, K., Moriwaka, M., Hayami, T.: Study on character input methods using eye-gaze input interface. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCII/HCI 2013, Part IV. LNCS, vol. 8007, pp. 320–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, J., Proctor, R.W.: Response-effect compatibility defines the natural scrolling direction. Hum. Factors 55(6), 1112–1129 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Atsuo Murata
    • 1
    Email author
  • Makoto Moriwaka
    • 1
  • Yusuke Takagishi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Intelligent Mechanical System, Graduate School of Natural Science and TechnologyOkayama UniversityOkayamaJapan

Personalised recommendations