Date post: | 20-May-2015 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | guest7cd961 |
View: | 2,911 times |
Download: | 0 times |
1
EVALUATING VISUAL CUES FOR WINDOW SWITCHING ON LARGE SCREENS
Raphael Hoffmann (University of Washington)
Patrick Baudisch (Microsoft Research)Daniel S. Weld (University of
Washington)
2
WHICH IS THE ACTIVE WINDOW?
3
ON LARGE SCREENS CHANGES MAY GO UNNOTICED
4
NOTICING CHANGE
Flashing of window moving to foreground
Flashing of window frame
Visual Search
5
A HIGHLY EFFECTIVE CUE?
6
QUESTION
Which notification technique is highly effective and has little side
effects?
7
DESIGN GOALS
2 Minimize impact on other screen content
3 Use sparse visual effects to minimize fatigue/annoyance
1 Minimize visual search time; Do not slow down users who already know where the target is
8
VISUAL CUES
frames trails
9
BLINKINGFRAME
10
REDFRAME
11
BUBBLEFRAME
12
SHADOWFRAME
13
MASK
14
CENTERBEAM
15
CENTERSPLASH
16
WINDOWSPLASH
17
WINDOWBEAM
18
OUTLINE
• Motivation• Related Work &
Visual Cues for Window Switching• Studies• Conclusion
19
PERCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS
high acuity vision
peripheral vision
20
PERCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS
21
FEATURE INTEGRATION THEORY(Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
1. Pre-attentive Search2. Attentive Search
22
COLORFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
23
MOTIONFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
24
SHAPEFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
25
SHADING + SHADOWSFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
26
NOISY BACKGROUND
27
COLOR VS. SHAPEFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
28
COLOR VS. SHAPEFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
>
29
HETEROGENOUS DISTRACTORSFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
30
HOMOGENOUS DISTRACTORSFeature Integration Theory (Treisman, Gelade; CP 1980)
31
WHAT STANDS OUT IN OUR UI?
32
POPOUT PRISMSuh, Woodruff, Rosenholtz, Glass; CHI 2002
33
HALOBaudisch, Rosenholtz; CHI 2003
+
34
SPOTLIGHTKhan, Matejka, Fitzmaurice, Kurtenbach; CHI 2005
+
35
PHOSPHORBaudisch, Tan, Collomb, Robbins, Hinckley, Agrawala, Zhao, Ramos; UIST 2006
DRAG-AND-POPBaudisch, Cutrell, Robbins, Czerwinski, Tandler, Bederson, Zierlinger; Interact 2003
36
TRAILS
• Work even when target outside field of view
• Reduce 2d search to 1d search
37
IMPLEMENTATION
• Program written in C# using WPF• Cues can be selected through a
configuration menu • System integrated with Alt-TAB
mechanism in Windows XP
38
OUTLINE
• Motivation• Related Work &
Visual Cues for Window Switching• Studies• Conclusion
39
<remind>:• Efficiency in finding target• Awareness of other screen content• Avoiding annoyance
WHICH CUE SUPPORTS USERS BEST?
40
SEARCH SPACE
( )2
= 160 combinations
x x x x x2 2 2 2
4+1
control
41
SEARCH SPACE
( )1
= 10 (combinations)
+ + + + +1 1 1 1
4+1
STUDY 1
42
SEARCH SPACE
( )1+ + + + +
1 1 1 1
4+1
43
SEARCH SPACE
1
= 6 combinations
+1
STUDY 2
1
1
1
1
+
+
+
+
44
STUDY 1: CUES IN ISOLATION
45
TASK
• Switch window focus by hitting space bar.• Locate newly active window and type
number (title bar read ‘Window - #’).
• If number correct, system removed it from title bar and replaced it with a new number on next switch
46
TASK
• In 20% of the cases when windows were switched, a popup window with a letter appeared for 350ms at another location.
• Participants were asked to type the letter, if they saw the popup.
• Participants rated annoyance on Likert scale;said what they prefered
47
MEASURED …
• Efficiency in finding target
• Awareness of other screen content
• Annoyance
task time
proportion of overlooked popups
subjective rating on 7pt Likert scale
48
STUDY DESIGN
• Within-subjects design, 10 conditions,62 repetitions, 10 participants
• Background content: 80 windows – 1/3 accessories, 1/3 web pages, 1/3 office docs
• Mixed Model analysis, ANOVA on ranks• Sequential Bonferroni correction
49
APPARATUS
• 24’’ + 30’’ + 24’’ displays• 25’’ distance to center monitor • Used leash to prevent moving
backwards
50
RESULTS – OVERVIEWTask Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
51
RESULTS – OVERVIEWTask Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
52
FRAMES – TASK TIME
BubbleFrame ShadowFrameControl BlinkingFrame RedFrame
0
1
2
3
sec
dominant dominant
53
FRAMES – ANNOYANCE
BubbleFrame ShadowFrameControl BlinkingFrame RedFrame
0
2
4
6
dominant dominant
54
PARTICIPANT’S FAVORITE FRAME Task Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
55
RESULTS – OVERVIEWTask Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
56
MASK – TASK TIME
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
sec
57
MASK – POPUP MISSES
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
58
MASK – ANNOYANCE
0
1
2
3
4
5
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
59
RESULTS – OVERVIEWTask Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
60
TRAILS – TASK TIME
CenterSplash WindowSplashControl CenterBeam WindowBeam
0
1
2
3
asymm. asymm.
61
PARTICIPANT’S FAVORITE TRAIL Task Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
62
RESULTS – OVERVIEWTask Time
Annoyance
Popup Misses
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Tas
k T
ime
(sec
onds
± S
EM
)
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
Pop
up D
etec
tion
Err
or (
N± S
EM
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ann
oyan
ce(r
atin
g ±
SE
M)
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Dark-Mask
Control
63
TRAILS/FRAMES – TASK TIMEtargets close
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
64
TRAILS/FRAMES – TASK TIMEtargets far
Control0
1
2
3
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
65
TRAILS/FRAMES – POPUP MISS.
8
10
12
Blinking-Frame
Bubble-Frame
Red-Frame
Shadow-Frame
Center-Beam
Center-Splash
Window-Beam
Window-Splash
Control
66
OPEN QUESTIONS• Does combining frames and trails make
better cues?
• Does adding additional frame features help?
• Will the mask improve with lower opacity (and a frame)?
+ > ?
+ + > + ?
> ?
67
STUDY 2: CUE COMBINATIONS
synergy or interference?
68
MASK + BUBBLE
69
CENTERSPLASH + REDFRAME
70
CS + RED + BUBBLE
71
CS + RED + BUBBLE + SHADOW
72
MASK + FRAMES – TASK TIME
Task Time
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
CenterSplash CenterSplash+ RedFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame+ BubbleFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame+ BubbleFrame+ ShadowFrame
sec
73
MASK + BUBBLETask Time
Annoyance
Control CenterSplash0
1
2
3
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
+ BubbleFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
+ BubbleFrame+ ShadowFrame
DarkMask+ BubbleFrame
0
2
4
6
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
+ BubbleFrame
CenterSplash+ RedFrame
+ BubbleFrame+ ShadowFrame
DarkMask+ BubbleFrame
CenterSplashControl
sec
74
PARTICIPANTS’ FAVORITE CUE
75
OUTLINE
• Motivation• Related Work &
Visual Cues for Window Switching• Studies• Conclusion
76
IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN• Visual sparseness: Even low-opacity masks
interfere w/ ability to detect target by its onset.
• Adapt cue by distance: When targets are far, trails perform better than frames.
• Use Asymmetric trails: Trails must stand out from rectilinear screen content.
• Use subtle features: Even low-opacity frames pop out; dominant features outperform others, but are more annoying.
• Use combinations: Combinations of frames and trails perform better than cues in isolation.
77
THANK YOU!
Raphael HoffmannComputer Science & Engineering
University of [email protected]
Patrick BaudischMicrosoft Research
Redmond, [email protected]
Daniel S. WeldComputer Science & Engineering
University of [email protected]
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant IIS-0307906, by the Office of Naval Research under grant N00014-06-1-0147, SRI International under CALO grant 03-000225 and the Washington Research Foundation / TJ Cable Professorship.