Performance comparisons were made among three “calculator watch” devices that employed different technologies for data input. These included hardware keys, software keys, and figural recognition. Although the figural recognition device supposedly required the least training to operate, other factors reduced its utility considerably. Specifically, entry rates were slower for this device and error rates higher than for the other two types of devices. Data entry rates were also compared to those possible for other modes of entry, including unconstrained methods.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AldenD.G.DanielsR.W.KanarickA.F.Keyboard design and operation: A review of the major issues. Human Factors, 1972, 14(4), 275–293.
2.
BeringerD.B.The design and evaluation of complex systems: Application to a man-machine interface for aerial navigation. Navigation, 1980, 27(3), 200–206.
3.
ConradR.Short-term memory factor in the design of data-entry keyboards: An interface between short-term memory and S-R compatability. Journal of Applied Psychology, October 1966, 50(5), 353–356.
4.
GoodmanD.DicksonJ.FrancasM.Human factors in keypad design. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 27th Annual Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society, October 1983, 191–195.
5.
KreifeldtJ.G.Hand calculator performance under interrupted operation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 25th Annual Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society, October 1981, 329–332.
6.
KvalsethT.O.To honor Fitts and repeal his law. Internal report. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, 1982.
7.
LickliderJ.C.R.Man-computer symbiosis. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, 1960, HFE-1(1), 4–11.
8.
MauroC.L.BowenH.M.CoskuntunaS.GilfoilD.M.Human factors analysis of a multi-function digital watch. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 24th Annual Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society, October 1980, 412–413.
9.
NorthR.A.Personal communication regarding expected input rates for continuous speech recognition system at Honeywell, Minneapolis, Minn. June, 1984.
10.
SeibelR.Data Entry Devices and Procedures. Chapter 7 in Van CottH.P.KinkadeR.G. (Eds.) Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.
11.
SimonelliN.M.Interdigit keying intervals on a membrane keyboard. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 25th Annual Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society, October 1981, 333–337.
