navtap: a long term study with excluded blind users
Post on 04-Jul-2015
357 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
A Long Term Study with
Excluded Blind Users
Tiago Guerreiro
Hugo Nicolau
Joaquim Jorge
Daniel Gonçalves
tjvg@vimmi.inesc-id.pt
‘‘
’’
Never doubt that a small group of committed
people can change the world.
Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.
— Margaret Mead
We have the whole world in our hands.
SMS and Mail have had an
enormous growth in the last few years.
Mobile devices can do anything.
A common image for me.
What about the
Others ?
Some can only see this.
They are too heavy.
They are too big.
They are too expensive...
And definitely not mobile.
Can speech synthesis replace
visual feedback?
Early and
adventitious
Blind
Variety of
Causes
Collateral Damages
Keep it Simple.
ABCDEFGHIJLMNOPQRSTUVXZ
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A BCD E FGH I JLMN O PQRST U VXZ
We can navigate in any direction.
A BCDEFGHIJLMNOPQRSTUVX Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
A B C D
E F G H
I J L M N
O P Q R S T
U V X Z
No wrong choices.
Just shorter paths.
No memorization required.
Short term Evaluation
Guerreiro et al., NavTap and BrailleTap: Non-Visual
input interfaces, In RESNA 2008
Session
Rate
Error Rate
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
1 2 3
MultiTap NavTap
0.80
0.88
0.68
1.07
1.32
1.37
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1 2 3
MultiTap NavTap
Words Per Minute
Session
WPM
Ease first contact
And still leaves
room for
improvement
How does it
behave on a long
term basis?
In real life...
How it affects the
users and their
habits?
Understand the limits
The user sample
49 to 64 years
Reduced to
performing and
taking calls
Calls
Info
Dial
Accept
Reject
SMS
Write
Read
Send
Receive
Agenda
Notebook
Study stages
Iterative (Re-)design Learning the basics (users)
Improving the prototype (us)
Evaluation Weekly laboratorial evaluation
Daily usage logging
3 weeks
3 sessions per week
30 minutes per session
Navigation Text-Entry
Events
Navigation
Text-Entry Events
Navigation
Text-Entry
Events
Fine Tuning
the prototype
Weekly Controlled Results
5 users
16 weeks
Words per Minute
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05
First session Last session
WPM
Participant
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05
First Session Last Session
4way - 2.85
2way - 4.88
Keystrokes per Character KSPC
Participant
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05
Preparation Time Navigation Time (same direction)
Navigation Time (direction shift)
0.45
0.58
1.25
0.8
1.22
0.30 0.45
0.58
0.62
1.1
1.08
0.8
1.25
1.24
0.8
1.0
1.22
1.16
1.93
0.83
Improvement in Interaction Times
MSD Error Rate
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05
Participant
0
1
2
3
4
5
Participants’ Opinion Rate
Daily Usage
Communication Method
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
P01
P02
P03
P04
P05
Calls SMS Participant
Overall Results
1200 received
1825 sent
Date Hour
Battery
Calculator
Alarm
Add Contact
Delete Contact
Search Contact
Make Call
Send SMS
Most Used Tasks
Usage Influence
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
P01 P02 P03 P04 P05
450
300
200
100
40
10
WPM vs. Sent SMSs
WPM
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
P01 P02 P03 P04
10 40 100 200 300 450
KSPC vs. Sent SMSs
Observing each
Participant
Participant 1 High Literacy Level
Used a 4-way approach
Near theoretical limit
Participant 2
Learning difficulties
Able to use NavTap
Enormous social inclusion
Participant 5
Low usage of text-messages
Social factors
Maintained his
navigation skills
Conclusions
Accessible for a wider user group
Impact on Social Interactions
Still Using NavTap
Long Term Analysis is IMPORTANT
The Future
Individual Differences
MultiTap learnability
MultiTap vs NavTap
(experienced )
Kevin Clarkson Martin Rotovnik
NavTap
A Long Term Study with Excluded
Blind Users
Tiago Guerreiro
tjvg@immi.inesc.pt
top related