Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: TK, TL
Touchscreen interfaces are widely used in modern technology, from mobile devices to in-car infotainment systems. However, touchscreens impose significant visual workload demands on the user which have safety implications for use in cars. Previous studies indicate that the application of haptic feedback can improve both performance of and affective response to user interfaces. This paper reports on and extends the findings of a 2009 study conducted to evaluate the effect of different combinations of touchscreen visual, audible and haptic feedback on driving and task performance, affective response and subjective workload, the initial findings of which were originally published in [8]. A total of 48 non-expert users completed the study. A dual-task approach was applied, using the Lane Change Test as the driving task and realistic automotive use case touchscreen tasks. Results indicated that while feedback type had no effect on driving or task performance, preference was expressed for multimodal feedback over visual alone. Issues with workload and cross-modal interaction were also identified.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] A. Sears, C. Plaisant, and B. Shneiderman, “A new era for high precision touchscreens,” in Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, H. R. Hartson and D. Hix, Eds., pp. 2-3, Ablex Publishing, New Jersey, NJ, USA, 1992.
    • [2] Gartner Incorporation, Gartner Says Touchscreen Mobile Device Sales Will Grow 97 Percent in 2010, March 2010, http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1313415. (Accessed 18th August 2011.)
    • [3] DisplaySearch, Touch Screens in Tablet PCs Forecast to Reach 60M in 2011, March 2011, http://www.displaysearch .com/cps/rde/xchg/displaysearch/hs.xsl/110314 touch screens in tablet pcs forecast to reach 60m in 2011.asp. (Accessed 18th August 2011.)
    • [4] M. J. Pitts, G. E. Burnett, L. Skrypchuk, T. Wellings, A. Attridge, and M. A. Williams, “Visual-haptic feedback interaction in automotive touchscreens,” Displays, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 7-16, 2012.
    • [5] W. W. Wierwille, “Development of an initial model relating deiver in-vehicle visual demands to accident rate,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Mid-Atlantic Human Factors Conference, pp. 1-7, Blacksburg, Va, USA, March 1995.
    • [6] S. G. Klauer, T. A. Dingus, V. L. Neale, J. D. Sudweeks, and D. J. Ramsey, “The impact of driver inattention on nearcrash/crash risk: an analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data,” Tech. Rep. DOT HS 810 594, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
    • [7] G. E. Burnett and J. M. Porter, “Ubiquitous computing within cars: designing controls for non-visual use,” International Journal of Human Computer Studies, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 521- 531, 2001.
    • [8] M. J. Pitts, M. A. Williams, T. Wellings, and A. Attridge, “Assessing subjective response to haptic feedback in automotive touchscreens,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '09), pp. 11-18, ACM, Essen, Germany, September 2009.
    • [9] C. D. Wickens and J. G. Hollands, Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 3rd edition, 2000.
    • [10] J. L. Burke, M. S. Prewett, A. A. Gray et al., “Comparing the effects of visual-auditory and visual-tactile feedback on user performance: a meta-analysis,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '06), pp. 108-117, Alberta, Canada, November 2006.
    • [11] I. Poupyrev, S. Maruyama, and J. Rekimoto, “Ambient touch: designing tactile interfaces for handheld devices,” in Proceedings of the 15th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 51-60, Paris, France, October 2002.
    • [12] E. Hoggan, S. A. Brewster, and J. Johnston, “Investigating the effectiveness of tactile feedback for mobile touchscreens,” in Proceedings of the 26th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08), pp. 1573-1582, Florence, Italy, April 2008.
    • [13] J.-H. Lee and C. Spence, “Assessing the benefits of multimodal feedback on dual-task performance under demanding conditions,” in Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction, vol. 1, pp. 185-192, British Computer Society, Liverpool, Uk, September 2008.
    • [14] C. Serafin, R. Heers, M. Tschirhart, C. Ullrich, and C. Ramstien, “User experience in the US and Germany of invehicle touch-screens with integrated haptic and auditory feedback,” in Proceedings of the SAE World Congress, Detroit, Mich, USA, April 2007.
    • [15] H. Richter, R. Ecker, C. Deisler, and A. Butz, “HapTouch and the 2+1 state model: potentials of haptic feedback on touch based in-vehicle information systems,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '10), pp. 72- 79, Pittsburgh, Pa, USA, November 2010.
    • [16] N. Bevan, “Usability is quality of use,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, A. Ogawa, Ed., Elsevier, Tokyo, Japan, July 1995.
    • [17] A. P. O. S. Vermeeren, E. L. C. Law, V. Roto, M. Obrist, J. Hoonhout, and K. Va¨a¨na¨nen-Vainio-Mattila, “User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs,” in Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on HumanComputer Interaction: Extending Boundaries (NordiCHI '10), pp. 521-530, Reykjavik, Iceland, October 2010.
    • [18] G. Burnett, “Designing and evaluating in-car user-interfaces,” in Handbook of Research on User-Interface Design and Evaluation for Mobile Technology, J. Lumsden, Ed., pp. 218-236, IGI Global, Hershey, Penn, USA, 2008.
    • [19] S. T. Godley, T. J. Triggs, and B. N. Fildes, “Driving simulator validation for speed research,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 589-600, 2002.
    • [20] M. P. Reed and P. A. Green, “Comparison of driving performance on-road and in a low-cost simulator using a concurrent telephone dialling task,” Ergonomics, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1015- 1037, 1999.
    • [21] T. W. Hoyes, N. A. Stanton, and R. G. Taylor, “Risk taking in simulated environments: evidence relevant to risk homeostasis theory,” in Traffic and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application, J. Rothengatter and E. Carbonell-Vaya, Eds., pp. 203-208, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1997.
    • [22] S. Mattes, “The lane-change-task as a tool for driver distraction evaluation,” in Quality of Work and Products in Enterprises of the Future, H. Strasser et al., Ed., p. 57, Ergonomia, Stuttgart, Germany, 2003.
    • [23] M. P. Bruyas, C. Brusque, H. Tattegrain, A. Auriault, I. Aillerie, and M. Duraz, “Consistency and sensitivity of lane change test according to driving simulator characteristics,” IET Intelligent Transport Systems, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 306-314, 2008.
    • [24] ISO 26022:2010-Road vehicles-Ergonomic aspects of transport information and control systems-Simulated lane change test to assess in-vehicle secondary task demand.
    • [25] J. Breuer, K. Bengler, C. Heinrich, and W. Reichelt, “Development of driver attention metrics (ADAM),” in Quality of Work and Products in Enterprises of the Future, H. Strasser et al., Ed., pp. 37-40, Ergonomia, Stuttgart, Germany, 2003.
    • [26] K. Young, M. G. Lenne´a, and A. R. Williamsona, “Sensitivity of the lane change test as a measure of in-vehicle system demand,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 611-618, 2010.
    • [27] J. L. Harbluk, J. S. Mitroi, and P. C. Burns, “Three navigation systems with three tasks: using the lane-change test (LCT) to assess distraction demand,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design, pp. 24-30, Montana, Mont, USA, June 2009.
    • [28] E. Mitsopoulos-Rubens, K. L. Young, and M. G. Lenne´, Utility of the Lane Change Test in Exploring the Effects on Driving Performance of Engaging in Additional in Vehicle Tasks While Driving, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Victoria, Australia, 2010.
    • [29] Institute of Ergonomics, Lane Change Test Screen Shot, Technische Universita¨t M u¨nchen, 2012, http://www.lfe.mw.tum .de/ media/de/research/labs/lct.jpg.
    • [30] H. Stone and J. L. Sidel, Sensory Evaluation Practices, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2004.
    • [31] D. V. Cicchetti, “Extension of multiple-range tests to interaction tables in the analysis of variance: a rapid approximate solution,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 77, no. 6, pp. 405-408, 1972.
    • [32] H. Abdi, “The bonferonni and Sˇida´k corrections for multiple comparisons,” in Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics, N. Salkind, Ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, Cailf, USA, 2007.
    • [33] A. Rydstro¨m, C. Grane, and P. Bengtsson, “Driver behaviour during haptic and visual secondary tasks,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '09), pp. 121- 127, Essen, Germany, September 2009.
    • [35] R. Leung, K. MacLean, M. B. Bertelsen, and M. Saubhasik, “Evaluation of haptically augmented touchscreen GUI elements under cognitive load,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '07), pp. 374-381, Nagoya, Japan, November 2007.
    • [36] V. Occelli, C. Spence, and M. Zampini, “Audiotactile interactions in temporal perception,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 429-454, 2011.
    • [37] S. Soto-Faraco and G. Deco, “Multisensory contributions to the perception of vibrotactile events,” Behavioural Brain Research, vol. 196, no. 2, pp. 145-154, 2009.
    • [38] C. Spence and M. Zampini, “Auditory contributions to multisensory product perception,” Acta Acustica united with Acustica, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 1009-1025, 2006.
    • [39] T. Petzoldt, N. Ba¨r, C. Ihle, and J. F. Krems, “Learning effects in the lane change task (LCT)-evidence from two experimental studies,” Transportation Research F, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2011.
    • [40] S. G. Hart and L. E. Staveland, “Development of NASATLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research,” in Human Mental Workload, P. A. Hancock and N. Meshkati, Eds., pp. 239-250, Elsevier Science Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1988.
    • [41] D. A. Norman, Emotional Design : Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things, Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
    • [42] T. Wellings, M. Williams, and C. Tennant, “Understanding customers' holistic perception of switches in automotive human-machine interfaces,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 8-17, 2010.
    • [43] T. Wellings, M. A. Williams, and M. Pitts, “Customer perception of switch-feel in luxury sports utility vehicles,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 737-746, 2008.
    • [44] T. Wellings, M. A. Williams, and C. Tennant, “Tactility, craftsmanship and the NPI process,” Tech. Rep., SAE Transactions Journal of Passenger Cars: Mechanical Systems, 2005.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article