Decoding Intent With Control Theory: Comparing Muscle Versus Manual Interface Performance

Vibrotactile Feedback & Skin StimulationElectrical Muscle Stimulation (EMS)Motor Impairment Assistive Input TechnologiesDisability Service ProvidersAssistive Technology Specialists

Manual device interaction requires precise coordination which may be difficult for users with motor impairments. Muscle interfaces provide alternative interaction methods that may enhance performance, but have not yet been evaluated for simple (eg. mouse tracking) and complex (eg. driving) continuous tasks. Control theory enables us to probe continuous task performance by separating user input into intent and error correction to quantify how motor impairments impact device interaction. We compared the effectiveness of a manual versus a muscle interface for eleven users without and three users with motor impairments performing continuous tasks. Both user groups preferred and performed better with the muscle versus the manual interface for the complex continuous task. These results suggest muscle interfaces and algorithms that can detect and augment user intent may be especially useful for future design of interfaces for continuous tasks.

Quick Actions

Share

Share this page

ios_share

https://hci.top/en/papers/chi/32058/2020

AdRecommended

Learn AI Coding at CodeNow

open_in_newOpen DOI Link
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376224
At a Glance

Paper Snapshot

fact_check
dataset
Source
CHI
calendar_month
Year
2020
emoji_events
Award
No award tagged
group
Authors
3 authors
sell
Subtopics
Vibrotactile Feedback & Skin Stimulation, Electrical Muscle Stimulation (EMS), Motor Impairment Assistive Input Technologies
work
Professions
Disability Service Providers, Assistive Technology Specialists
article
Content Status
Abstract only
hub
Related Papers
5 related papers