To twist, roll, stroke or poke? A study of input devices for menu navigation in the cockpit

Stanton, Neville A.; Harvey, Catherine; Plant, Katherine L.; Bolton, Luke

doi:10.1080/00140139.2012.751458

Cited by 30 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Authors concluded that touch screens help pilots to keep their attention, reduce cognitive effort, search time, and motor movement. A similar study was conducted by Stanton et al [5] which confirmed these findings. However, subjective impressions revealed an increased discomfort compared to other input devices.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Designing touch screen user interfaces for future flight deck operations

Avsar

Fischer

Rodden

2016

2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Many interactional issues with Flight ManagementSystems (FMS) in modern flight decks have been reported. Avionics designers are seeking for ways to reduce cognitive load of pilots with the aim to reduce the potential for human error. Academic research showed that touch screen interfaces reduce cognitive effort and provide an intuitive way of interaction. A new way of interaction to manipulate radio frequencies of avionics systems is presented in this paper. A usability experiment simulating departures and approaches to airports was used to evaluate the interface and compare it with the current system (FMS). In addition, interviews with pilots were conducted to find out their personal impressions and to reveal problem areas of the interface. Analyses of task completion time and error rates showed that the touch interface is significantly faster and less prone to user input errors than the conventional input method (via physical or virtual keypad). Potential problem areas were identified and an improved interface is suggested.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Designing touch screen user interfaces for future flight deck operations

Avsar

Fischer

Rodden

2016

2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several empirical studies have suggested that incorporating touchscreens into the cockpit environment could offer advantages over other input devices. Stanton et al (2013) examined the comparative performance of four different types of input device (trackball, rotary controller, touchpad and touchscreen) for in-flight menu navigation, concluding that the touchscreen offered the best overall performance across a variety of measures. Thomas (2017) recently analysed pointing performance using a Fitts' Law methodology, comparing a hand-on-throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) isotonic pointing fingerstick with three input devicestrackball, trackpad, and touchscreen.…”

Section: Cockpit Touchscreen Interactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and evaluation of braced touch for touchscreen input stabilisation

Cockburn

Masson

Gutwin

et al. 2019

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TIncorporating touchscreen interaction into cockpit flight systems offers several potential advantages to aircraft manufacturers, airlines, and pilots. However, vibration and turbulence are challenges to reliable interaction. We examine the design space for braced touch interaction, which allows users to mechanically stabilise selections by bracing multiple fingers on the touchscreen before completing selection. Our goal is to enable fast and accurate target selection during high levels of vibration, without impeding interaction performance when vibration is absent. Three variant methods of braced touch are evaluated, using doubletap, dwell, or a force threshold in combination with heuristic selection criteria to discriminate intentional selection from concurrent braced contacts. We carried out an experiment to test the performance of these methods in both abstract selection tasks and more realistic flight tasks. The study results confirm that bracing improves performance during vibration, and show that doubletap was the best of the tested methods.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have found that fixed touchscreen use tends to be more physically demanding and lead to more bodily discomfort (Stanton et al 2013;Harvey et al 2011) and suffer from higher error rates (Avsar, Fischer andRodden 2015, Cockburn et al, 2017) than other input devices such as trackballs and touchpads (Lin et al, 2010;Yau, Chao andHwang, 2008, Cockburn et al, 2017). However despite this, in a flight deck context, for all vibration conditions, the usability and workload appeared comparable to those reported from other input devices, for both the centre and side screens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…aircraft, robotics or cycling); aircraft being categorized under other environments as only two papers were identified in this domain. These identified that the use of touchscreens in the cockpit can improve performance when compared with trackball inputs (Eichinger & Kellerer, 2014) as well as rotary controllers and touch pads (Stanton et al, 2013), however as only static conditions were investigated, these findings may not apply for non-static conditions. Touchscreens were also found to be more usable by those engaging with them in simulated cockpit environments when compared to alternative inputs (Stanton et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future technology on the flight deck: assessing the use of touchscreens in vibration environments

Coutts

Plant

Smith³

et al. 2019

Ergonomics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of touchscreens in the flight deck has been steadily increasing, however their usability may be severely impacted when turbulent conditions arise. Most previous research focusses on using touchscreens in static conditions, therefore this study assessed touchscreen use whilst undergoing turbulent representative motion, generated using a 6-axis motion simulator. Touchscreens were tested in centre, side and overhead positions, to investigate how turbulence affected: (1) error rate, movement times and accuracy, (2) arm fatigue and discomfort. Two touchscreen technologies were compared: a 15" infra-red and a 17.3" projected capacitive touchscreen with force sensing capability. The potential of the force sensing capability to minimise unintentional interactions was also investigated. Twenty-six participants undertook multi-direction tapping (ISO 9241; ISO, 2010) and gesture tasks, under four vibration conditions (control, light chop, light turbulence and moderate turbulence). Error rate, movement time and workload increased and usability decreased significantly, with screen position and increasing turbulence level.

show abstract

To twist, roll, stroke or poke? A study of input devices for menu navigation in the cockpit

Cited by 30 publications

References 53 publications

Designing touch screen user interfaces for future flight deck operations

Designing touch screen user interfaces for future flight deck operations

Design and evaluation of braced touch for touchscreen input stabilisation

Future technology on the flight deck: assessing the use of touchscreens in vibration environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About