Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
User interface design by sketching, as well as other sketching activities, typically involves sketching objects through representations that should combine meaningfulness for the end users and easiness for the recognition engines. To investigate this relationship, a multi-platform user interface design tool has been developed that enables designers to sketch design ideas in multiple levels of fidelity with multistrokegestures supporting widget representations andcommands. A usability analysis of these activities, as they are submitted to a recognition engine, suggests that the level of fidelity, the amount of constraints imposed on the representations, and the visual difference of representations positively impact the sketching activity as a whole. Implications for further sketch representations in user interface design and beyond are provided based on usability guidelines.
Citation preview
Suzanne Kieffer, Adrien Coyette, Jean Vanderdonckt
Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium
{suzanne.kieffer, adrien.coyette, jean.vanderdonckt}@uclouvain.be
Berlin, Germany – June 19-23, 2010
A design tool for the user interface prototyping• Multi-stroke bi-directional sketching of representations• Object recognition based on a graphical grammar• Multiple gesture representations of the same object• Multiple levels of fidelity
http://www.usixml.org/, funded by- ITEA2 Call 3 – Ref. 2008026- Eureka Project 3674
2EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany
∑! 3674
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany3
DENIM: Lin et al., CHI’2000
JavaSketchIt: Caetano et al., 2002
Gabbeh: Naghsh et al., DSVIS’2005SILK: Landay & Myers, 1995
InkKit: Plimmer et al., CHI’2004 SketchRead: Alvarado, 2004
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany4
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany5
1: none2: low3: medium4: high
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany6
Experiment 1 (XP1)• Determine the most preferred and drawn
gestural representations for each object depending on the user type (designer vs standard user)
Experiment 2 (XP2)• Study the potential influence of the level of
fidelity on the sketching task
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany7
2 groups of 30 subjects• Designers: people with relevant experience in
computer science and user interface design
• End-users: people without any prior knowledge in computer science or user interface design Involve the end-user early in the software
development life-cycle
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany8
1st phase• Catalogue of 32 widgets• How do participants sketch the widgets? Widget representations
2nd phase• Categories of representations• How do participants rank the representations? Most common object representation
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany9
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany10
Experiment 1 (XP1)• Determine the most preferred and drawn
gestural representations for each object depending on the user type (designer vs standard user)
Experiment 2 (XP2)• Study the potential influence of the level of
fidelity on the sketching task
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany12
Usability study of the potential influence of widget representation complexity on user performances
Measures and usability criteria• Speed (efficiency)• Accuracy (effectiveness)
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany13
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany14
Participants: 11 volunteers (22<age<28) with significant pen-based interaction experience
Task: series of widget sketches with a constant rotation between the widget and the fidelity level
Setup: 4 fidelity levels x 12 widgets x 2 iterations
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany15
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany16
21-inch Wacom Cintiq 21UX touch screen flat panel
Fidelity level has no influence on user speed and accuracy Interpretation: users do not change their sketching strategy whatever the fidelity level is
Widget representation has a highly significant effect on user speed and accuracy Further investigation: which specific widget characteristics lead to such a statistical difference
Widget classification according to relevant characteristics based on recursive partitioning and recognition rate
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany17
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany18
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany19
One-Way ANOVA Procedure Variables: sketching times & delete operations
Basic widgets• Label, text field, picture (2 shapes)• Check-box, radio button (juxtaposition)
Complex widgets• Button, text area (inclusion)• Slider (intersection)• Combo box, list box, progress bar, and toggle
button (complex inclusion)
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany20
2 experiments• Identification of the preferred representations• Complexity analysis of widget representations
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany21
The level of fidelity has no impact on the sketching of any individual widget
The quality of the recognition depends on the type of widget representation
Any representation of an object to be sketched should minimize the amount of constraints (e.g. inclusion, intersection, sequence)
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany22
Naturalness supports creative design process
Non-obtrusion avoids disturbing the designer during the prototyping phase
Continuity during drawing improves and facilitates the prototyping task
Recovery enables the re-use of previous material
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany23
FP7 Human project ITEA2 Call 3 UsiXML project
Contact informationsuzanne.kiefferadrien.coyette @uclouvain.bejean.vanderdonckt
EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany24
![External Representations in Ubiquitous Computing Design ... · revealed the importance of paper and sketching of multiple representations during early stage design [22]. Newman and](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/6049539246050d60682ebfad/external-representations-in-ubiquitous-computing-design-revealed-the-importance.jpg)
