The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning

Introducing a new hobby for other people may inspire them to join with you. Reading, as one of mutual hobby, is considered as the very easy hobby to do. But, many people are not interested in this hobby. Why? Boring is the reason of why. However, this feel actually can deal with the book and time of you reading. Yeah, one that we will refer to break the boredom in reading is choosing the myth of the paperless office as the reading material.

The Myth of the Paperless Office

Past research on shape displays has primarily focused on rendering content and user interface elements through shape output, with less emphasis on dynamically changing UIs. We propose utilizing shape displays in three different ways to mediate interaction: to facilitate by providing dynamic physical affordances through shape change, to restrict by guiding users with dynamic physical constraints, and to manipulate by actuating physical objects. We outline potential interaction techniques and introduce Dynamic Physical Affordances and Constraints with our inFORM system, built on top of a state-of-the-art shape display, which provides for variable stiffness rendering and real-time user input through direct touch and tangible interaction. A set of motivating examples demonstrates how dynamic affordances, constraints and object actuation can create novel interaction possibilities.

https://static.ideaconnection.com/docs/12432/uist335-follmer.pdf

inFORM: dynamic physical affordances and constraints through shape and object actuation

What does reliability mean for building a grounded theory? What about when writing an auto-ethnography? When is it appropriate to use measures like inter-rater reliability (IRR)? Reliability is a familiar concept in traditional scientific practice, but how, and even whether to establish reliability in qualitative research is an oft-debated question. For researchers in highly interdisciplinary fields like computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) and human-computer interaction (HCI), the question is particularly complex as collaborators bring diverse epistemologies and training to their research. In this article, we use two approaches to understand reliability in qualitative research. We first investigate and describe local norms in the CSCW and HCI literature, then we combine examples from these findings with guidelines from methods literature to help researchers answer questions like: "should I calculate IRR?" Drawing on a meta-analysis of a representative sample of CSCW and HCI papers from 2016-2018, we find that authors use a variety of approaches to communicate reliability; notably, IRR is rare, occurring in around 1/9 of qualitative papers. We reflect on current practices and propose guidelines for reporting on reliability in qualitative research using IRR as a central example of a form of agreement. The guidelines are designed to generate discussion and orient new CSCW and HCI scholars and reviewers to reliability in qualitative research.

/pdf/reliability-and-inter-rater-reliability-in-qualitative-2aubgdtns7.pdf

Reliability and Inter-rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: Norms and Guidelines for CSCW and HCI Practice

We introduce UltraHaptics, a system designed to provide multi-point haptic feedback above an interactive surface. UltraHaptics employs focused ultrasound to project discrete points of haptic feedback through the display and directly on to users' unadorned hands. We investigate the desirable properties of an acoustically transparent display and demonstrate that the system is capable of creating multiple localised points of feedback in mid-air. Through psychophysical experiments we show that feedback points with different tactile properties can be identified at smaller separations. We also show that users are able to distinguish between different vibration frequencies of non-contact points with training. Finally, we explore a number of exciting new interaction possibilities that UltraHaptics provides.

/pdf/ultrahaptics-multi-point-mid-air-haptic-feedback-for-touch-q3nuf9ld4v.pdf

UltraHaptics: multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces

We introduce FingerFlux, an output technique to generate near-surface haptic feedback on interactive tabletops. Our system combines electromagnetic actuation with permanent magnets attached to the user's hand. FingerFlux lets users feel the interface before touching, and can create both attracting and repelling forces. This enables applications such as reducing drifting, adding physical constraints to virtual controls, and guiding the user without visual output. We show that users can feel vibration patterns up to 35 mm above our table, and that FingerFlux can significantly reduce drifting when operating on-screen buttons without looking.

FingerFlux: near-surface haptic feedback on tabletops

Elderly users suffering from hand tremor have difficulties interacting with touchscreens because of finger oscillation. It has been previously observed that sliding one's finger across the screen may help reduce this oscillation. In this work, we empirically confirm this advantage by (1) measuring finger oscillation during different actions and (2) comparing error rate and user satisfaction between traditional tapping and swabbing in which the user slides his finger towards a target on a screen edge to select it. We found that oscillation is generally reduced during sliding. Also, compared to tapping, swabbing resulted in improved error rates and user satisfaction. We believe that swabbing will make touchscreens more accessible to senior users with tremor.

/pdf/evaluating-swabbing-a-touchscreen-input-method-for-elderly-2e9a8lsy01.pdf

Evaluating swabbing: a touchscreen input method for elderly users with tremor

We present an experimental comparison of tangible rotary knobs and touch-based virtual knobs in three output conditions: eyes-on, eyes-free, and peripheral. Twenty participants completed a simple rotation task on a interactive surface with four different input techniques (two tangibles and two virtual touch widgets) in the three output conditions, representing the distance from the locus of attention. We found that users were in average 20% faster using tangible knobs than using the virtual knobs. We found that tangible knobs retains performance even if they are not in the locus of attention of the users. We provide four recommendations of suit- able choosing knobs based on tasks and design constraints.

Knobology Revisited: A Comparison of User Performance between Tangible and Virtual Rotary Knobs

Touch-sensitive fabrics let users operate wearable devices unobtrusively and with rich input gestures similar to those on modern smartphones and tablets. While hardware prototypes exist in the DIY crafting community, HCI designers and researchers have little data about how well these devices actually work in realistic situations. FabriTouch is the first flexible touch-sensitive fabric that provides such scientifically validated information. We show that placing a FabriTouch pad onto clothing and the body instead of a rigid support surface significantly reduces input speed but still allows for basic gestures. We also show the impact of sitting, standing, and walking on horizontal and vertical swipe gesture performance in a menu navigation task. Finally, we provide the details necessary to replicate our FabriTouch pad, to enable both the DIY crafting community and HCI researchers and designers to build on our work.

FabriTouch: exploring flexible touch input on textiles

Several fields of science are experiencing a "replication crisis" that has negatively impacted their credibility. Assessing the validity of a contribution via replicability of its experimental evidence and reproducibility of its analyses requires access to relevant study materials, data, and code. Failing to share them limits the ability to scrutinize or build-upon the research, ultimately hindering scientific progress. Understanding how the diverse research artifacts in HCI impact sharing can help produce informed recommendations for individual researchers and policy-makers in HCI. Therefore, we surveyed authors of CHI 2018-2019 papers, asking if they share their papers' research materials and data, how they share them, and why they do not. The results (34% response rate) show that sharing is uncommon, partly due to misunderstandings about the purpose of sharing and reliable hosting. We conclude with recommendations for fostering open research practices. This paper and all data and materials are freely available at https://osf.io/3bu6t.

/pdf/transparency-of-chi-research-artifacts-results-of-a-self-ddhx0453co.pdf

Chat Wacharamanotham

Papers

FingerFlux: near-surface haptic feedback on tabletops

Evaluating swabbing: a touchscreen input method for elderly users with tremor

Knobology Revisited: A Comparison of User Performance between Tangible and Virtual Rotary Knobs

FabriTouch: exploring flexible touch input on textiles

Transparency of CHI Research Artifacts: Results of a Self-Reported Survey