As the number of touchscreen displays begin to proliferate in work settings the need for display placement recommendations based on sound practices and good science rises. While studies have reported on touch display placement and resulting postures and discomfort for seated computer users, investigation into the adjustment requirements for standing workers using a touchscreen display and keyboard are limited, and focus primarily on handheld units. This poster describes a methodology combining existing research and anthropometric modeling to develop a recommended range of touchscreen placement suitable for standing computer users who also need to interface with a keyboard.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeatonRJWelmanN, Effects of touch key size and separation on menu-selection accuracy, SPIE Proceedings, 1985, Vol 0526, 8-12.
2.
BenderG. T. (1999). Touch screen performance as a function of the duration of auditory feedback and target size (Doctoral dissertation, Wichita State University).
3.
BeringerDBPetersonJG, Underlying behavior parameters of the operation of touch-input devices: Biases, models and feedback. Human Factors, 1985, Vol 27, 445-458.
4.
CAESAR: Summary Statistics for the Adult Population (ages 18-65) of the USA, AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2002-0170..
5.
CamilleriM, Multiple Monitor Use: Visual and Ergonomics Implications. Presented at Research to Practice: Evidence-based Ergonomics in the Workplace, a continuing education program supported by the University of California at Berkeley, 2011.
6.
ChauJYvan der PloegHvan UffelenJWongJRiphagenIHealyGGilsonNDunstanDWBaumanAOwenNBrownW. (2010). Are workplace interventions to reduce sitting effective? A systematic review. Preventive Medicine51, 352-356.
7.
ChourasiaAOWiegmannDAChenKBIrwinCBSestoME, Effect of Sitting or Standing on Touch Screen Performance and Touch Characteristics, Human Factors, 2013. Electronic
8.
ColleH. A.HiszemK. J. (2004). Standing at a kiosk: Effects of key size and spacing on touch screen numeric keypad performance and user preference. Ergonomics, 47, 1406–1423.
9.
HusemannBVon MachCYBorsottoDZepfKIScharnbacherJ (2009). Comparisons of Musculoskeletal Complaints and Data Entry Between a Sitting and a Sit-Stand Workstation Paradigm. Human Factors, Vol 51(3), 310-320.
10.
RitcheyPPeresSCDuffieldTJ, Differences in Muscle Activity for 4 Touch Devices. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2012.Vol 56: 1, 1594-1598.
11.
RobertsonMCirielloVMGarabetAM (2012). Office ergonomics training and a sit-stand workstation: Effects on musculoskeletal and visual symptoms and performance of office workers. Applied Ergonomics, Vol 44(1), 73-85.
12.
ScottBConzolaV, Designing Touch Screen Numeric Keypads Effects of Finger Size, Key Size, and Key Spacing, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 1997, Vol 41:1, 360-364.
13.
SestoM. E.IrwinC. B.ChenK. B.ChourasiaA. O.WiegmannD. A. (2012). Effect of touch screen button size and spacing on touch characteristics of users with and without disabilities. Human Factors, 54 (3), 425-436.
14.
ShinGZhuXUser discomfort, work posture and muscle activity while using a touchscreen in a desktop PC setting. Ergonomics, 2011, Vol 54:8, 733-744.
15.
StrakerL.LevineJ.CampbellA. (2009). The effects of walking and cycling computer workstations on keyboard and mouse performance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 51(6), 831-844.
16.
ToyKJPeresSCDavidTYNeryAPhillipsRG, Examining User Preferences in Interacting with Touchscreen Devices, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2012.Vol 56:1, 1862-1866.
