Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Gaze+touch vs. touch

Research

Associated organisational units

Electronic data

  • Gaze+Touch-TradeOffs

    Rights statement: The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-2268-2_27

    Accepted author manuscript, 575 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Gaze+touch vs. touch: what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays?

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Conference contribution/Paper › peer-review

Published

Standard

Gaze+touch vs. touch: what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays? / Pfeuffer, Ken; Alexander, Jason Mark; Gellersen, Hans-Werner Georg.
Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015. ed. / Julio Abascal; Simone Barbosa; Mirko Fetter; Tom Gross; Philippe Palanque; Marco Winckler. Springer International Publishing, 2015. p. 349-367.

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Conference contribution/Paper › peer-review

Harvard

Pfeuffer, K, Alexander, JM & Gellersen, H-WG 2015, Gaze+touch vs. touch: what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays? in J Abascal, S Barbosa, M Fetter, T Gross, P Palanque & M Winckler (eds), Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015. Springer International Publishing, pp. 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27

APA

Pfeuffer, K., Alexander, J. M., & Gellersen, H-W. G. (2015). Gaze+touch vs. touch: what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays? In J. Abascal, S. Barbosa, M. Fetter, T. Gross, P. Palanque, & M. Winckler (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015 (pp. 349-367). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27

Vancouver

Pfeuffer K, Alexander JM, Gellersen H-WG. Gaze+touch vs. touch: what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays? In Abascal J, Barbosa S, Fetter M, Gross T, Palanque P, Winckler M, editors, Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015. Springer International Publishing. 2015. p. 349-367 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27

Author

Pfeuffer, Ken ; Alexander, Jason Mark ; Gellersen, Hans-Werner Georg. / Gaze+touch vs. touch : what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays?. Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015. editor / Julio Abascal ; Simone Barbosa ; Mirko Fetter ; Tom Gross ; Philippe Palanque ; Marco Winckler. Springer International Publishing, 2015. pp. 349-367

Bibtex

@inproceedings{fef006a0ed994792a8cac116d79f90c4,
title = "Gaze+touch vs. touch: what{\textquoteright}s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays?",
abstract = "Direct touch input is employed on many devices, but it is inherently restricted to displays that are reachable by the user. Gaze input as a mediator can extend touch to remote displays - using gaze for remote selection, and touch for local manipulation - but at what cost and benefit? In this paper, we investigate the potential trade-off with four experiments that empirically compare remote Gaze+touch to standard touch. Our experiments investigate dragging, rotation, and scaling tasks. Results indicate that Gaze+touch is, compared to touch, (1) equally fast and more accurate for rotation and scaling, (2) slower and less accurate for dragging, and (3) enables selection of smaller targets. Our participants confirm this trend, and are positive about the relaxed finger placement of Gaze+touch. Our experiments provide detailed performance characteristics to consider for the design of Gaze+touch interaction of remote displays. We further discuss insights into strengths and drawbacks in contrast to direct touch.",
author = "Ken Pfeuffer and Alexander, {Jason Mark} and Gellersen, {Hans-Werner Georg}",
note = "The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-2268-2_27",
year = "2015",
month = aug,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783319226682",
pages = "349--367",
editor = "Julio Abascal and Simone Barbosa and Mirko Fetter and Tom Gross and Philippe Palanque and Marco Winckler",
booktitle = "Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015",
publisher = "Springer International Publishing",

}

RIS

TY - GEN

T1 - Gaze+touch vs. touch

T2 - what’s the trade-off when using gaze to extend touch to remote displays?

AU - Pfeuffer, Ken

AU - Alexander, Jason Mark

AU - Gellersen, Hans-Werner Georg

N1 - The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-2268-2_27

PY - 2015/8/30

Y1 - 2015/8/30

N2 - Direct touch input is employed on many devices, but it is inherently restricted to displays that are reachable by the user. Gaze input as a mediator can extend touch to remote displays - using gaze for remote selection, and touch for local manipulation - but at what cost and benefit? In this paper, we investigate the potential trade-off with four experiments that empirically compare remote Gaze+touch to standard touch. Our experiments investigate dragging, rotation, and scaling tasks. Results indicate that Gaze+touch is, compared to touch, (1) equally fast and more accurate for rotation and scaling, (2) slower and less accurate for dragging, and (3) enables selection of smaller targets. Our participants confirm this trend, and are positive about the relaxed finger placement of Gaze+touch. Our experiments provide detailed performance characteristics to consider for the design of Gaze+touch interaction of remote displays. We further discuss insights into strengths and drawbacks in contrast to direct touch.

AB - Direct touch input is employed on many devices, but it is inherently restricted to displays that are reachable by the user. Gaze input as a mediator can extend touch to remote displays - using gaze for remote selection, and touch for local manipulation - but at what cost and benefit? In this paper, we investigate the potential trade-off with four experiments that empirically compare remote Gaze+touch to standard touch. Our experiments investigate dragging, rotation, and scaling tasks. Results indicate that Gaze+touch is, compared to touch, (1) equally fast and more accurate for rotation and scaling, (2) slower and less accurate for dragging, and (3) enables selection of smaller targets. Our participants confirm this trend, and are positive about the relaxed finger placement of Gaze+touch. Our experiments provide detailed performance characteristics to consider for the design of Gaze+touch interaction of remote displays. We further discuss insights into strengths and drawbacks in contrast to direct touch.

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_27

M3 - Conference contribution/Paper

SN - 9783319226682

SP - 349

EP - 367

BT - Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015

A2 - Abascal, Julio

A2 - Barbosa, Simone

A2 - Fetter, Mirko

A2 - Gross, Tom

A2 - Palanque, Philippe

A2 - Winckler, Marco

PB - Springer International Publishing

ER -