This paper summarizes observations from four empirical studies focusing on shape replication with three input methods. The aim was to identify and assess how the components of several semirandomly generated shapes influence how accurately untrained users can replicate each of these components. We found that the pen is the least and touch the most error-prone method when used for drawing. Additionally, the distribution of errors was analyzed. The results may be used to predict which shape properties make shape replication more difficult. Additionally, the results may be used to design shapes that are easy to replicate.

This short paper is a work-in-progress report on an experimental comparison and evalua tion of users' performance in f our linetracing tasks based on two shapes and performed with three input methods (mouse, stylus, and touch-input). The shapes' properties used in the study created the two classes of shapes: easy and hard to replicate. As expected these two classes had different impact on user's performance in each task tested (tracing, lasso selection, steering through narrow and wide tunnel). The results show tha t participants replicating the shapes using touch-input were the least accurate but were the fastest in comparison to the remaining input methods. The stylus was the least error-prone method and the mouse was the slowest device in drawing tasks (tracing and selection). The differences in error distances between the input methods were less pronounced in steering ta sks but timing data showed that mouse was still the slowest one. While the time of replication did not differ between the two sh apes tested, the differences between the errors participants made were significant for all tasks and input devices, and patterns of these differences were consistent between the shapes. These results confirm predictions from a previous study and show which shapes' properties can make their replication more difficult. T he results can be used to design shapes that are easy to repli cate, e.g., in surface-based gestural interaction.

This short paper is a work-in-progress report on an experimental, exploratory comparison and evaluation of three input methods (mouse, pen, and touch-input) in a line-tracing task. A method to compare the original shape and user-generated version is presented. Measurements of user efficiency and accuracy showed that participants replicating a particular shape using touch-input performed the worst in terms of accuracy but were the fastest in comparison to the remaining input methods. No effect of controlled visual feedback was observed. Additionally, subjective operational biases were observed that, together with input method and expected shape related issues, might strongly affect the results.

This paper presents the results of an empirical comparative study investigating how the outcomes of a computerized figural creativity test are affected when the participants use two different versions of the Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a mouse-operated desktop PC. The results show that participants get insignificantly lower creativity scores with the elaborated GUI, contrary to the GUI that has no visual artifacts available and offers more similar user experience to pen and paper, even though they spend significantly more time on drawing with the elaborated one. That phenomenon is expected to contribute to the cumulative effect of GUI and input method noticed by previous research. That implies that creative drawing and testing should be carefully introduced into computer-based environments.