A study of unidirectional swipe gestures on in-vehicle touch screens

Burnett, Gary; Crundall, Elizabeth; Large, David R.; Lawson, Glyn; Skrypchuk, Lee

doi:10.1145/2516540.2516545

Cited by 27 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As touchscreen infotainment systems became popular in cars, researchers investigated in-car touch-based interactions [3,6,9,11,20,24]. Kern and Schmidt [10] discussed the increased number of input devices (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Input Controls for In-Car Interactions

Brewster

Beruscha

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The way drivers operate in-car systems is rapidly changing as traditional physical controls, such as buttons and dials, are being replaced by touchscreens and touch-sensing surfaces. This has the potential to increase driver distraction and error as controls may be harder to find and use. This paper presents an in-car, on the road driving study which examined three key types of input controls to investigate their effects: a physical dial, pressure-based input on a touch surface and touch input on a touchscreen. The physical dial and pressure-based input were also evaluated with and without haptic feedback. The study was conducted with users performing a list-based targeting task using the different controls while driving on public roads. Eye-gaze was recorded to measure distraction from the primary task of driving. The results showed that target accuracy was high across all input methods (greater than 94%). Pressurebased targeting was the slowest while directly tapping on the targets was the faster selection method. Pressure-based input also caused the largest number of glances towards to the touchscreen but the duration of each glance was shorter than directly touching the screen. Our study will enable designers to make more appropriate design choices for future in-car interactions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Input Controls for In-Car Interactions

Brewster

Beruscha

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this will require further advancement regarding how we incorporate necessary elements of reality into MR (and particularly VR) experiences (McGill et al 2015), and necessitates the interactive environment of the vehicle be tailored or made accessible to the MR headset. Related work has investigated how well drivers and passengers point (Ahmad et al 2015) and perform common gestures such as swiping (Burnett et al 2013) on touchscreens. The use of pressure input is becoming more popular with touchscreen smartphones, so researchers have also begun to explore in-car touchscreens and centre console surfaces with force-sensing capabilities to look for alternative input modalities that could be more effective and safer to use in vehicles (Ng and Brewster 2016;.…”

Section: Resolving This Challengementioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in passenger use of mixed reality headsets in cars and other transportation

McGill

Williamson

et al. 2019

Virtual Reality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines key challenges in supporting passenger use of augmented and virtual reality headsets in transit. These headsets will allow passengers to break free from the restraints of physical displays placed in constrained environments such as cars, trains and planes. Moreover, they have the potential to allow passengers to make better use of their time by making travel more productive and enjoyable, supporting both privacy and immersion. However, there are significant barriers to headset usage by passengers in transit contexts. These barriers range from impediments that would entirely prevent safe usage and function (e.g. motion sickness) to those that might impair their adoption (e.g. social acceptability). We identify the key challenges that need to be overcome and discuss the necessary resolutions and research required to facilitate adoption and realize the potential advantages of using mixed reality headsets in transit.

show abstract

“…Previous work has studied different types of input with in-car touchscreens (e.g. [2,6]) and more recently pressurebased interactions on in-car touch-sensitive surfaces (e.g. [13,20,21]) as force input is becoming more common with popular touchscreen mobile devices such as the Apple iPhone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A body of research has studied different types of touch input on centre consoles as touchscreens have become more widespread in cars [6,8,14,16,26]. Previous work has examined the effects of scrolling tasks on driving performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Touch and Pressure-Based Scrolling and Haptic Feedback for In-Car Touchscreens

Brewster

2017

Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An in-car study was conducted to examine different input techniques for list-based scrolling tasks and the effectiveness of haptic feedback for in-car touchscreens. The use of physical switchgear on centre consoles is decreasing which allows designers to develop new ways to interact with incar applications. However, these new methods need to be evaluated to ensure they are usable. Therefore, three input techniques were tested: direct scrolling, pressure-based scrolling and scrolling using onscreen buttons on a touchscreen. The results showed that direct scrolling was less accurate than using onscreen buttons and pressure input, but took almost half the time when compared to the onscreen buttons and was almost three times quicker than pressure input. Vibrotactile feedback did not improve input performance but was preferred by the users. Understanding the speed vs. accuracy trade-off between these input techniques will allow better decisions when designing safer incar interfaces for scrolling applications.

show abstract

A study of unidirectional swipe gestures on in-vehicle touch screens

Cited by 27 publications

References 14 publications

An Evaluation of Input Controls for In-Car Interactions

An Evaluation of Input Controls for In-Car Interactions

Challenges in passenger use of mixed reality headsets in cars and other transportation

An Evaluation of Touch and Pressure-Based Scrolling and Haptic Feedback for In-Car Touchscreens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About