Squeeze vs. tilt: A comparative study using continuous tactile feedback

Eve Hoggan; Dari Trendafilov; Teemu Ahmaniemi; Roope Raisamo

doi:10.1145/1979742.1979766

Squeeze vs. tilt: A comparative study using continuous tactile feedback

Eve Hoggan, Dari Trendafilov, Teemu Ahmaniemi, Roope Raisamo

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper presents an investigation into the performance of squeezing as a manipulative interaction technique in comparison to tilting with an aim to answer two questions: is squeezing an effective input technique for mobile devices and can tactile feedback improve performance? The experiment results show that both input methods are viable but squeezing is significantly faster and more sustainable than tilting (with and without tactile feedback).

Original language	English
Title of host publication	CHI EA'11 Procs Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher	ACM Press
Pages	1309-1314
Number of pages	6
ISBN (Print)	9781450302289
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979766
Publication status	Published - 8 Jun 2011
Event	29th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2011 - Vancouver, BC, Canada Duration: 7 May 2011 → 12 May 2011

Conference

Conference	29th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2011
Country/Territory	Canada
City	Vancouver, BC
Period	7/05/11 → 12/05/11

Keywords

Haptic I/O
Mobile interaction
Pressure
Squeeze

Access to Document

10.1145/1979742.1979766

Cite this

@inproceedings{1b9aa53f1a9d4f4192df7f1bb53d073a,

title = "Squeeze vs. tilt: A comparative study using continuous tactile feedback",

abstract = "This paper presents an investigation into the performance of squeezing as a manipulative interaction technique in comparison to tilting with an aim to answer two questions: is squeezing an effective input technique for mobile devices and can tactile feedback improve performance? The experiment results show that both input methods are viable but squeezing is significantly faster and more sustainable than tilting (with and without tactile feedback).",

keywords = "Haptic I/O, Mobile interaction, Pressure, Squeeze",

author = "Eve Hoggan and Dari Trendafilov and Teemu Ahmaniemi and Roope Raisamo",

year = "2011",

month = jun,

day = "8",

doi = "10.1145/1979742.1979766",

language = "English",

isbn = "9781450302289",

pages = "1309--1314",

booktitle = "CHI EA'11 Procs Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems",

publisher = "ACM Press",

address = "United States",

note = "29th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2011 ; Conference date: 07-05-2011 Through 12-05-2011",

}

Hoggan, E, Trendafilov, D, Ahmaniemi, T & Raisamo, R 2011, Squeeze vs. tilt: A comparative study using continuous tactile feedback. in CHI EA'11 Procs Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, pp. 1309-1314, 29th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 7/05/11. https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979766

TY - GEN

T1 - Squeeze vs. tilt

T2 - 29th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2011

AU - Hoggan, Eve

AU - Trendafilov, Dari

AU - Ahmaniemi, Teemu

AU - Raisamo, Roope

PY - 2011/6/8

Y1 - 2011/6/8

N2 - This paper presents an investigation into the performance of squeezing as a manipulative interaction technique in comparison to tilting with an aim to answer two questions: is squeezing an effective input technique for mobile devices and can tactile feedback improve performance? The experiment results show that both input methods are viable but squeezing is significantly faster and more sustainable than tilting (with and without tactile feedback).

AB - This paper presents an investigation into the performance of squeezing as a manipulative interaction technique in comparison to tilting with an aim to answer two questions: is squeezing an effective input technique for mobile devices and can tactile feedback improve performance? The experiment results show that both input methods are viable but squeezing is significantly faster and more sustainable than tilting (with and without tactile feedback).

KW - Haptic I/O

KW - Mobile interaction

KW - Pressure

KW - Squeeze

U2 - 10.1145/1979742.1979766

DO - 10.1145/1979742.1979766

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:79957943879

SN - 9781450302289

SP - 1309

EP - 1314

BT - CHI EA'11 Procs Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

PB - ACM Press

Y2 - 7 May 2011 through 12 May 2011

ER -

Squeeze vs. tilt: A comparative study using continuous tactile feedback

Abstract

Conference

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this