Advertisement

Allgegenwärtige Mensch-Computer-Interaktion

Beispiele aus der Interaktion in öffentlichen und halb-öffentlichen Raum und von benutzbarer Sicherheit
Chapter
First Online:
  • 1.4k Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Computer durchdringen unseren Alltag. Dabei sind diese derart in unsere Umgebung eingebettet, dass diese von uns nicht mehr als solche wahrgenommen werden. Hierdurch entsteht die Notwendigkeit zur Schaffung unmittelbar verständlicher Benutzerschnittstellen – sowohl für Individuen als auch für Gruppen von Benutzern. Mit diesem Teilbereich der Informatik beschäftigt sich die Mensch‐Computer‐Interaktion. Dieser Beitrag bietet zunächst eine kurze Einführung in die Forschungsmethodik der MCI und gibt einen Einblick in die Forschungsaktivitäten zu diesem Thema an den Münchner Universitäten. Im Fokus stehen hierbei Arbeiten zu öffentlichen Bildschirmen, Blickinteraktion im öffentlichen Raum, sowie die Entwicklung sicherer und gleichzeitig benutzbarer Authentifizierungsverfahren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Weiser M (1991) The computer for the 21st century. Sci Am 265:94–104. doi:10.1145/329124.329126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ishii H, Ullmer B (1997) Tangible Bits: Towards Seamless Interfaces between People, Bits and Atoms. In: Proc. Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. ACM Press, Atlanta, GA, pp 234–241Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Norman DA (1998) The Invisible Computer. Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moritz EF, Biel S, Burkhard M, et al (2014) Functions: How We Understood and Realized Functions of Real Importance to Users. In: Moritz EF (ed) Assist. Technol. Interact. Elder. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ott F, Koch M (2012) Social Software Beyond the Desktop – Ambient Awareness and Ubiquitous Activity Streaming. it – Inf Technol 54:243–252. doi:  10.1524/itit.2012.0687 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper A (2004) The Inmates are running the Asylum: Why High Tech Products Drive us Crazy and How to Restore the Sanity. Sams – Pearson EducationGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Herczeg M, Koch M (2015) Allgegenwärtige Mensch-Computer-Interaktion. Informatik-Spektrum 38:290–295. doi:  10.1007/s00287-015-0901-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alt F, Schneegaß S, Schmidt A, et al (2012) How to evaluate public displays. In: Proc. 2012 Int. Symp. Pervasive Displays (PerDis 2012). ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alt F, Vehns J (2016) Opportunistic Deployments: Challenges and Opportunities of Conducting Public Display Research at an Airport. Proc Intl Symp on Pervasive Displays. doi: 10.1145/2914920.2915020Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coutrix C, Kuikkaniemi K, Kurvinen E, et al (2011) FizzyVis: Designing for Playful Information Browsing on a Multitouch Public Display. In: Proc. Des. Pleasurable Prod. Interfaces (DPPI ’11). ACM Press, p 27:1–27:8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peltonen P, Kurvinen E, Salovaara A, et al (2008) „It’s Mine, Don’t Touch!“: Interactions at a Large Multi-Touch Display in a City Centre. Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst 1285–1294. doi:  10.1145/1357054.1357255
  12. 12.
    Koch M, Ott F (2011) CommunityMirrors als Informationsstrahler in Unternehmen: Von abstraktem Kontext zu realen Arbeitsumgebungen. Informatik-Spektrum 34:153–164. doi:  10.1007/s00287-010-0517-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nutsi A, Koch M (2016) Readability in Multi-User Large-Screen Scenarios. Proc 9th Nord Conf Human-Computer Interact. doi:  10.1145/2971485.2971491
  14. 14.
    Lösch E, Nutsi A, Koch M (2015) Mediating Movement-based Interaction through Semiotically Enhanced Shadow Representations. In: Proc. UbiComp 2015. ACM Press, pp 783–786Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vogel D, Balakrishnan R (2004) Interactive Public Ambient Displays: Transitioning from Implicit to Explicit, Public to Personal, Interaction with Multiple Users. In: Feiner S, Landay JA (eds) Proc. 17th Annu. ACM Symp. User iIterface Softw. Technol. ACM Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico, pp 137–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michelis D, Müller J (2011) The Audience Funnel: Observations of Gesture Based Interaction With Multiple Large Displays in a City Center. Int J Hum Comput Interact 27:562–579. doi:  10.1080/10447318.2011.555299 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Müller J, Alt F, Michelis D, Schmidt A (2010) Requirements and design space for interactive public displays. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Multimed. – MM ’10. ACM Press, pp 1285–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nutsi A, Koch M (2015) Multi-User Usability Guidelines for Interactive Wall Display Applications. Proc Intl Symp on Pervasive Displays (PerDis). doi:  10.1145/2757710.2776798
  19. 19.
    Huang EM, Koster A, Borchers J (2008) Overcoming assumptions and uncovering practices: When does the public really look at public displays? In: Proc. Pervasive 2008, LNCS 5013. Springer, Berlin, pp 228–243Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    So JCY, Chan AHS (2009) Design factors on dynamic text display. Eng Lett 16:16–19. doi:  10.1063/1.3078118 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mohs C, Hurtienne J, Israel JH, et al (2006) IUUI – Intuitive Use of User Interfaces. In: Proc. Usability Prof. 2006. pp 130–133Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raskin J (1994) Viewpoint: Intuitive equals familiar. Commun ACM 37:17–18. doi: 10.1145/182987.584629Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Herczeg M (2009) Software-Ergonomie – Theorien, Modelle und Kriterien für gebrauchstaugliche interaktive Computersysteme, 3. Aufl. de Gruyter Oldenbourg, MünchenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hassenzahl M, Beu A, Burmester M (2001) Engineering Joy. IEEE Softw 18:70–76. doi:  10.1109/52.903170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hatscher M (2000) Joy of use: Determinanten der Freude bei der Softwarenutzung. Universität OsnabrückGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reeps IE (2004) Joy-of-Use – eine neue Qualität für interaktive Produkte. Universität KonstanzGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kötteritzsch A, Koch M, Wallrafen S (2016) Expand Your Comfort Zone! Smart Urban Objects to Promote Safety in Public Spaces for Older Adults. Adjun Proc UbiComp 2016. doi:  10.1145/2968219.2968418
  28. 28.
    Alt F, Shirazi AS, Kubitza T, Schmidt A (2013) Interaction techniques for creating and exchanging content with public displays. In: Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 1709–1718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Davies N, Clinch S, Alt F (2014) Pervasive Displays – Understanding the Future of Digital Signage. doi:  10.2200/S00558ED1V01Y201312MPC011
  30. 30.
    Müller J, Walter R, Bailly G, et al (2012) Looking Glass: A Field Study on Noticing Interactivity of a Shop Window. In: Proc. 2012 ACM Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 297–306Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Khamis M, Alt F, Bulling A (2016) Challenges and Design Space of Gaze-enabled Public Displays. Proc 2016 ACM Int Jt Conf Pervasive Ubiquitous Comput. doi:  10.1145/2968219.2968342
  32. 32.
    Khamis M, Trotter L, Tessmann M, et al (2016) EyeVote in the Wild: Do Users bother Correcting System Errors on Public Displays? Proc 15th Int Conf Mob Ubiquitous Multimed. doi:  10.1145/3012709.3012743
  33. 33.
    Poole A, Ball LJ (2005) Eye Tracking in Human-Computer Interaction and Usability Research: Current Status and Future Prospects. Encycl Human-Computer Interact 211–219. doi:  10.4018/978-1-59140-562-7
  34. 34.
    Alt F, Bulling A, Gravanis G, Buschek D (2015) GravitySpot: Guiding Users in Front of Public Displays Using On-Screen Visual Cues. Proc. 28th ACM Symp. User Interface Softw. Technol.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vidal M, Bulling A, Gellersen H (2013) Pursuits: Spontaneous Interaction with Displays Based on Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement and Moving Targets. In: Proc. 2013 ACM Int. Jt. Conf. Pervasive Ubiquitous Comput. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Khamis M, Saltuk O, Hang A, et al (2016) TextPursuits: Using Text for Pursuits-based Interaction and Calibration on Public Displays. In: Proc. 2016 ACM Int. Jt. Conf. Pervasive Ubiquitous Comput. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 274–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bulling A, Alt F, Schmidt A (2012) Increasing The Security Of Gaze-Based Cued-Recall Graphical Passwords Using Saliency Masks. In: Proc. 2012 ACM Annu. Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 3011–3020Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Alt F, Mikusz M, Schneegass S, Bulling A (2016) Memorability of Cued-Recall Graphical Passwords with Saliency Masks. Proc. 15th Intl. Conf. Mob. Ubiquitous Multimed.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Itti L, Koch C (2001) Computational modelling of visual attention. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:194–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Aviv AJ, Gibson K, Mossop E, et al (2010) Smudge Attacks on Smartphone Touch Screens. Proc. 4th USENIX Conf. Offensive Technol.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schneegass S, Steimle F, Bulling A, et al (2014) SmudgeSafe: Geometric Image Transformations for Smudge-resistant User Authentication. Proc. 2014 ACM Int. Jt. Conf. Pervasive Ubiquitous Comput.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Alt F, Schneegass S, Shirazi AS, et al (2015) Graphical Passwords in the Wild: Understanding How Users Choose Pictures and Passwords in Image-based Authentication Schemes. In: Proc. 17th Intl. Conf. Human-Computer Interact. with Mob. Devices Serv. ACM Press, pp 316–322Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Abdelrahman Y, Khamis M, Schneegass S, Alt F (2017) Stay Cool! Understanding Thermal Attacks on Mobile-based User Authentication. Proc. Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Buschek D, De Luca A, Alt F (2016) Evaluating the Influence of Targets and Hand Postures on Touch-based Behavioural Biometrics. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Buschek D, Alt F (2017) ProbUI: Generalising Touch Target Representations to Enable Declarative Gesture Definition for Probabilistic GUIs. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Michelman P (2017) Why the Human Voice Is the Year’s Most Important Technology. In: MITSloan Manag. Rev. Blog.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland  2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fakultät für InformatikUniversität der Bundeswehr MünchenMünchenDeutschland
  2. 2.Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und StatistikLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenMünchenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options