Grip

Bergh, Jan Van den; Sahni, Deepak; Haesen, Mieke; Luyten, Kris; Coninx, Karin

doi:10.1145/1996461.1996508

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A wireframe should be recommended when the intended interaction is too dynamic to be illustrated on paper. Grip classifies prototyping tools (Van den Bergh, Sahni, Haesen, Luyten, & Coninx, 2011) to underline their ability to support GUI prototyping in various LoFs.…”

Section: Level Of Fidelity and Gui Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Should We Deal with Malicious Customers’ Threats in Online Review? Perspectives of Retailers, Customers, and Platforms

Bhargava,

Lee,

et al. 2024

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eye movement-based analyses have been extensively performed on graphical user interface designs, mainly on high-fidelity prototypes such as coded prototypes. However, practitioners usually initiate the development life cycle with low-fidelity prototypes, such as mock-ups or sketches. Since little or no eye movement analysis has been performed on the latter, would eye tracking transpose its benefits from high-to low-fidelity prototypes and produce different results? To bridge this gap, we performed an eye movement-based analysis that compares gaze point indexes, gaze event types and durations, fixation and saccade indexes produced by N =8 participants between two treatments, a paper prototype vs. a wireframe. The paper also reports a qualitative analysis based on the answers provided by these participants in a semi-directed interview and on a perceived usability questionnaire with 14 items. Due to its interactivity, the wireframe seems to foster a more exploratory approach to design (e.g., testing and navigating more extensively) than the paper prototype.

show abstract

Section: Level Of Fidelity and Gui Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Should We Deal with Malicious Customers’ Threats in Online Review? Perspectives of Retailers, Customers, and Platforms

Bhargava,

Lee,

et al. 2024

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In early stages authors like van Buskirk and Moroney [10] recommend working with paper prototypes or other low fidelity prototypes to test different ideas fast with little effort. As stated by Van den Berg et al [11], once interactive behavior is needed, more sophisticated prototypes (e.g. implemented with HTML) are typically realized with prototyping tools like Balsamiq 4 , Axure 5 , or Pidoco 6 .…”

Section: Rapid Prototyping Of Gesture Interactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…https://msdn.microsoft.com/de-de/library/dn785306.aspx11 https://msdn.microsoft.com/de-de/library/dn785304.aspx…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Support for Coherent Prototyping of 3D Gesture Interactions

Rupprecht

Blum

Bomsdorf

2018

Human-Centered Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When prototyping applications that include touchless 3D gesture interaction three design matters must be taken into consideration: the gestures the user must execute, the visual representation and the dialog flow. Ideally, these aspects should be considered in parallel, to achieve a coherent design process, and avoid ineffective extra effort stemming from coordination between them. A flexible changeover of perspectives among the separate matters is needed. This paper proposes a software environment that enables the desired coherent rapid prototyping of applications with 3D gesture interactions. Its core consists of two types of mapping and a so-called co-simulation functionality. The environment facilitates combining existing software tools from industry and literature to cover the three design matters, i.e. specification and simulation of UI prototypes, gestures, and dialog models. It assists developers at design time in the specification of gestures and in binding them to UI prototypes as well as to statecharts used for defining dialog models. Relevant coherency information is used to offer the option to evaluate gestures at runtime in the context of UI prototype and dialog model. The co-simulator manages the synchronized simulation of all relevant artefacts once a gesture event occurs. Therefore, it enables quickly building prototypes that go beyond the capabilities of the individual tools. This paper describes the usage of the proposed environment in form of a case study with several software tools, each covering one of the three design aspects. It also shows its general applicability, meaning that it can be used with other tools too.

show abstract

“…In total we have retained 17 tools as follows: SILK [7], DENIM [8], DEMAIS [9] and Cog Tool [10] (from ACM CHI), Gambit [11] (from ACM DIS), GRIP-it [12] (from ACM EICS), Mirage [4], Ensemble [13], Lapidary [14], Druid [15] and Monet [16] (from ACM UIST), SIRIUS [17], MODE [18], SCENARIOO [19], Freeform [20] and Sketch XML [21] (from IFIP INTERACT), and Active Story Enhanced [6].…”

Section: Selection Of Academic Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study of Milestones for Featuring GUI Prototyping Tools

Silva¹,

Hak²,

Winckler³

et al. 2017

JSEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prototyping is one of the core activities of User-Centered Design (UCD) processes and an integral component of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research. For many years, prototyping was synonym of paper-based mockups and only more recently we can say that dedicated tools for supporting prototyping activities really reach the market. In this paper, we propose to analyze the evolution of prototyping tools for supporting the development process of interactive systems. For that, this paper presents a review of the literature. We analyze the tools proposed by academic community as a proof of concepts and/or support to research activities. Moreover, we also analyze prototyping tools that are available in the market. We report our observation in terms of features that appear over time and constitute milestones for understating the evolution of concerns related to the development and use of prototyping tools. This survey covers publications published since 1988 in some of the main HCI conferences and 118 commercial tools available on the web. The results enable a brief comparison of characteristics present in both academic and commercial tools, how they have evolved, and what are the gaps that can provide insights for future research and development.

show abstract

Grip

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

How Should We Deal with Malicious Customers’ Threats in Online Review? Perspectives of Retailers, Customers, and Platforms

How Should We Deal with Malicious Customers’ Threats in Online Review? Perspectives of Retailers, Customers, and Platforms

Software Support for Coherent Prototyping of 3D Gesture Interactions

A Comparative Study of Milestones for Featuring GUI Prototyping Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About