2018
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-90170-1_10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proposal of a Tangible Interface to Enhance Seniors’ TV Experience: UX Evaluation of SIX

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, there are studies about tangible programming languages that looked to explore consistent ways to physicalize information structure and specify computer behavior [8,16]. Additionally, there are proposals of soft interfaces [1,35], tangible handheld devices [12], or dices [45,50,54] that serve as an alternative to the remote-control and provide a new way to interact with the TV.…”
Section: Related Explorations For Tuismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, there are studies about tangible programming languages that looked to explore consistent ways to physicalize information structure and specify computer behavior [8,16]. Additionally, there are proposals of soft interfaces [1,35], tangible handheld devices [12], or dices [45,50,54] that serve as an alternative to the remote-control and provide a new way to interact with the TV.…”
Section: Related Explorations For Tuismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, cubes or dices are a form of TUIs commonly used to interact with TVs [45,54], capable of describing data [26] or performing TV control interactions [50]. Therefore, designers could use the cube to picture graphs as in Datafied representations can also inspire data physicalization strategies [30] following the designs of our participants.…”
Section: Tuis and Tangible Algorithmic Imaginariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to them, the problems encountered come mainly from individuals' characteristics (e.g., trembling hands, grasping issues, finger imprecision, visual impairments, memory decrease, learnability decrease), but also from the ergonomics of devices, particularly the remote control (e.g., including a large number of functions, unfamiliar functions, small labels, small symbols, small buttons, a small gap between buttons, inflexible layout (e.g., buttons cannot be reorganized), small device, lack of a backlight, requiring a specific body position to avoid losing infrared signal). This electronic device, which is already part of the everyday life of OAs [55], needs to be adapted to the rapid development of new services accessible through the TV interface.…”
Section: Interactions Between the Personal And The Technological Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other scholars have presented soft interfaces [2,29], tangible handheld devices [13], or dices [35,40,43] to interact with the TV set. While researchers have centered these approaches in providing new forms to interact with the TV disregarding movie recommendations, they also provide a set of design choices that allow us to explore the interaction with recommender algorithms usually consumed on a TV screen, such as personalized movie recommendations.…”
Section: Tangible Programming and Interaction With Tvsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, we were interested in testing whether the design of TUIs can gain from the self-projection that users tend to link with recommender systems [28,33] and tangible algorithmic imaginaries [5], in contrast with more abstract or general shapes for the interface. Third, since previous TUIs studied both soft pillow-like [2,29] and hard cube-like interfaces [35,40,43] to interact with TVs, we desired to analyze whether one or the other is more appealing for the personalized movie recommendation context. Fourth, we were interested in studying if users express any preference between one single-device strategy to interact with the movie recommendations but with limited interaction possibilities, or a two-devices strategy to increase their interactive options with the interface.…”
Section: Preliminary Design Space Rationalementioning
confidence: 99%