Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human–Computer Interaction: Comparison of Different Contributions Based on Opinion and Survey

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Engineering Materials (FLAME 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

Abstract

Human–computer interaction (HCI) has a long and contentious history of “technology.” The academic and consistent status of HCI is regularly called into question, resulting in hollow rhetoric. In the 1970s, it grew quickly from research laboratories, coinciding with the term of the Decennial conferences. Since its inception, there have been concerns regarding his standing as a normal academic object, on which many of them have concentrated their attention. In this paper, a comparative study was conducted between the main parameters of human–computer interaction, which are analytical and theoretical contribution. Three types of discoveries are described here: the first is conceptual, the second is operational, and the third is analytical. HCI is widely recognised as an interdisciplinary study topic. It takes years and years for new types of knowledge and information to arise, integrate, and stabilise in HCI. Several sorts of study findings have evolved over time, and the gaps in this research were identified using opinion datasets and survey contributions. This makes it easy to comprehend how much human–computer interaction is feasible in real time.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sun Y, Wen Z, Zhang S (2021) Experience in teaching design of human-computer interaction through evaluation and research. In: International conference on applied human factors and ergonomics. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kumar A, Sharma K, Dixit AR (2020) Role of graphene in biosensor and protective textile against viruses. Med Hypotheses 144:110253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Xu W et al (2021) From human-computer interaction to human-AI interaction: new challenges and opportunities for enabling human-centered AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.05424

  4. Saxena A, Kumar J, Deolia VK, Roy D (2022) Assesment of traditional and hybrid controller for controlling robotic manipulator system. In: Recent advances in industrial production. Springer, Singapore, pp 509–515

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bouzekri E et al (2021) Should I add recommendations to my warning system? The RCRAFT framework can answer this and other questions about supporting the assessment of automation designs. In: IFIP conference on human-computer interaction. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shukla MK, Sharma K (2019) Effect of functionalized graphene/CNT ratio on the synergetic enhancement of mechanical and thermal properties of epoxy hybrid composite. Mater Res Express 6(8):085318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmid D (2021) Single pilot operations along the human-centered design lifecycle: reviewing the dedicated support concept. In: Congress of the international ergonomics association. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  8. Benne D, Schöbel S, Janson A (2021) Persuasive design for smart personal assistants-a theory-motivated state-of-the-art analysis

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jarosz M et al (2021) Multi-platform intelligent system for multimodal human-computer interaction. Comput Inf 40(1):83–103

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bressa N et al (2021) What’s the situation with situated visualization? A survey and perspectives on situatedness. In: IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ramírez AJ, Reijers HA, Enríquez JG (2021) 9 Human–computer interaction analysis for RPA support. In: Robotic Process Automation. De Gruyter Oldenbourg, 2021, pp 169–186

    Google Scholar 

  12. Roodbandi J, Sadat A et al (2021) Research outputs in ergonomics and human factors engineering: a bibliometric and co-word analysis of content and contributions. Int J Occup Safety Ergon just-accepted:1–42

    Google Scholar 

  13. Saxena A, Kumar J, Sharma K, Roy D (2022) Designing and analysis of dynamic model for robotic manipulator. In: Advances in energy technology. Springer, Singapore, pp 683–691

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mao C-C, Chen C-H (2021) Augmented reality of 3D content application in common operational picture training system for army. Int J Hum Comput Interact 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ahmed S et al (2021) Hand gestures recognition using radar sensors for human-computer-interaction: a review. Remote Sens 13(3):527

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schmidt A, Alt F, Mäkelä V (2021) Evaluation in human-computer interaction–beyond lab studies. In: Extended abstracts of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. GLA University, Mathura, India

    Krishnakant Dixit & Kanchan Yadav

Authors
  1. Krishnakant Dixit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kanchan Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Krishnakant Dixit .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amity School of Engineering and Technology, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    R. K. Tyagi

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amity School of Engineering and Technology, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Pallav Gupta

  3. Department of Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

    Prosenjit Das

  4. School of Materials Science and Technology, Indian Institute of Technology BHU, Varanasi, India

    Rajiv Prakash

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Dixit, K., Yadav, K. (2024). Human–Computer Interaction: Comparison of Different Contributions Based on Opinion and Survey. In: Tyagi, R.K., Gupta, P., Das, P., Prakash, R. (eds) Advances in Engineering Materials. FLAME 2022. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4758-4_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4758-4_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-4757-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-4758-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation