Are 4 hands better than 2?: bimanual interaction for quadmanual user interfaces

ABSTRACT

The design of spatial user interaction for immersive virtual environments (IVEs) is an inherently difficult task. Missing haptic feedback and spatial misperception hinder an efficient direct interaction with virtual objects. Moreover, interaction performance depends on a variety of ergonomics factors, such as the user's endurance, muscular strength, as well as fitness. However, the potential benefits of direct and natural interaction offered by IVEs encourage research to create more efficient interaction methods. We suggest a novel way of 3D interaction by utilizing the fact that for many tasks, bimanual interaction shows benefits over one-handed interaction in a confined interaction space. In this paper we push this idea even further and introduce quadmanual user interfaces (QUIs) with two additional, virtual hands. These magic hands allow the user to keep their arms in a comfortable position yet still interact with multiple virtual interaction spaces. To analyze our approach we conducted a performance experiment inspired by a Fitts' Law selection task, investigating the feasibility of our approach for the natural interaction with 3D objects in virtual space.

References

1. Argelaguet, F., and Andujar, C. A survey of 3D object selection techniques for virtual environments. Computers & Graphics 37, 3 (2013), 121--136.
2. Balakrishnan, R., and Hinckley, K. Symmetric bimanual interaction. In Proc. of ACM CHI (2000), 33--40.
3. Bruder, G., Steinicke, F., and Stuerzlinger, W. Effects of visual conflicts on 3D selection task performance in stereoscopic display environments. In Proc. of ACM 3DUI (2013), 115--118.
4. Bruder, G., Steinicke, F., and Stuerzlinger, W. Touching the Void Revisited: Analyses of Touch Behavior On and Above Tabletop Surfaces. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT 2013 8117 (2013), 278--296.
5. Buxton, W., and Myers, B. A Study in Two-Handed Input. In Human Factors in Computing Systems (1986), 321--326.
6. Fitts, P. The Information Capacity of the Human Motor System in Controlling the Amplitude of Movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology 47, 6 (1954), 381--391.
7. Groen, J., and Werkhoven, P. Visuomotor adaptation to virtual hand position in interactive virtual environments. Presence 7, 5 (1998), 429--446.
8. Kobayashi, M., and Igarashi, T. Ninja cursors: using multiple cursors to assist target acquisition on large screens. In In Proc. of ACM CHI 08, 949958. ACM (2008).
9. Lemmerman, D., and LaViola, Jr., J. Effects of interaction-display offset on user performance in surround screen virtual environments. In Proc. of IEEE Virtual Reality (2007), 303--304.
10. Lubos, P., Bruder, G., and Steinicke, F. Analysis of Direct Selection in Head-Mounted Display Environments. In Proc. of IEEE 3DUI (2014), 11--18.
11. MacKenzie, C. L., Marteniuka, R. G., Dugasa, C., Liskea, D., and Eickmeiera, B. Three-dimensional movement trajectories in fitts' task: Implications for control. Q.J. Exp. Psychology-A 39, 4 (1987), 629--647.
12. Norman, D. The Design of Every-Day Things. PhD thesis, MIT, 1998.
13. Ohnishi, T., Lindeman, R., and Kiyokawa, K. Multiple Multi-touch Touchpads for 3D Selection. In Proc. of 3DUI (2011), 115--116.
14. Teather, R., Allison, R., and Stuerzlinger, W. Evaluating visual/motor co-location in fish-tank virtual reality. In Proc. of Toronto International Conference (2009), 624--629.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)

    • HCI design and evaluation methods

    • Interaction devices

      • Touch screens