Indirect 2D Touch Panning: How Does It Affect Spatial Memory and Navigation Performance?
summary
A controlled study with 18 participants uses a 23 inch horizontal display, a 12×9 grid with 18 items and search sequences of eight items across eight blocks to compare direct touch, indirect equal-size input, and indirect input scaled 0.5 for one-finger 2D panning and a keyboard-based recall task. Measured mean recall error, pure panning time, and navigation efficiency. Results show no drop in spatial memory and smaller indirect surface improves navigation efficiency despite more clutching and no time penalty for improved efficiency.
AI-written summary · about
related talks
21mGaze-Shifting: Direct-Indirect Input with Pen and Touch Modulated by Gaze
20mIntroducing Transient Gestures to Improve Pan and Zoom on Touch Surfaces
20mDriftBoard: A Panning-Based Text Entry Technique for Ultra-Small Touchscreens
19mPin-and-Cross: A Unimanual Multitouch Technique Combining Static Touches with ...
20mEffects of an Adaptive Modality Selection Algorithm for Navigation Systems
21mSummon and Select: Rapid Interaction with Interface Controls in Mid-air
20mIt's a Wrap: Mapping On-Skin Input to Off-Skin Displays
16mPageFlip: Leveraging Page-Flipping Gestures for Efficient Command and Value Selection on ...