Comparing the Performance, Workload, and Usability of a Gamepad and Joystick in a Complex Task

Rupp, Michael A.; Oppold, Paul; McConnell, Daniel S.

doi:10.1177/1541931213571398

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Xbox controller resulted in the fastest reticle adjustment and marker placement performance, except in the 100% transparency condition, in which mouse and Xbox were equally fast. These results agree with previous research (Rupp et al, 2013), and support the importance of interface control selection. However, there was no effect of controller on accuracy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Transparency and Controller Type on Performance in A Multi-Layer Display

Leibner

Proaps

Bliss

2019

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Augmented reality application development faces the challenge of balancing key information visualization with user’s cognitive constraints. Virtual Reality Rehab, Inc. is developing an application blending augmented reality (AR) with synthetic vision for use in complex, time-sensitive military operations. This study investigated the effects of controller use and transparency on marker placement speed and accuracy. Method: Participants were required to mark targets by placing icons on the synthetic environment using either a mouse, speech recognition, or Xbox One controller. They were also asked to recall AR building labels. For each scenario, the display was set to 100%, 25%, 50%, or 75% transparency. Results: The 50% transparency condition resulted in the lowest speed and accuracy, while 25% and 75% were not significantly different. Participants performed the best while using the Xbox One controller. Discussion: Findings suggest that transparency should be investigated within the context of task, controller type, and interface design.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Users must mentally map joystick actions to their intentions (Rogers, Bowman, & Oliver, 2015). Some researchers have found that Xbox and joystick controllers result in better performance (Jagacinski, Hartzell, & Ward, 1978;Rupp, Oppold, & McConnell, 2013) (MacKenzie & Soukoreff, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Transparency and Controller Type on Performance in A Multi-Layer Display

Leibner

Proaps

Bliss

2019

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first category is typically combined with an element of the second one and is used in ground control stations for both military and civil applications (Haque et al, 2017). The second category, some elements of which have been also compared (Rupp et al, 2013), is very frequently used in entertainment (Kim et al, 2018). A customer-level instance of the third category involving a virtual joystick is provided by Parrot with the AR.FreeFlight 2 application interface (Parrot, 2012); a second instance regards a prototype of multitouch drone control (Kang et al, 2018).…”

Section: Related Work On Traditional and Natural Interaction-based Dr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Natural Human-Drone Embodied Interface: Empirical Comparison With a Traditional Interface

Vincenzo¹,

Palini²,

Marsico

et al. 2022

Front. Neurorobot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the importance of usability in human-machine interaction (HMI), most commonly used devices are not usable by all potential users. In particular, users with low or null technological experience, or with special needs, require carefully designed systems and easy-to-use interfaces supporting recognition over recall. To this purpose, Natural User Interfaces (NUIs) represent an effective strategy as the user's learning is facilitated by features of the interface that mimic the human “natural” sensorimotor embodied interactions with the environment. This paper compares the usability of a new NUI (based on an eye-tracker and hand gesture recognition) with a traditional interface (keyboard) for the distal control of a simulated drone flying in a virtual environment. The whole interface relies on “dAIsy”, a new software allowing the flexible use of different input devices and the control of different robotic platforms. The 59 users involved in the study were required to complete two tasks with each interface, while their performance was recorded: (a) exploration: detecting trees embedded in an urban environment; (b) accuracy: guiding the drone as accurately and fast as possible along a predefined track. Then they were administered questionnaires regarding the user's background, the perceived embodiment of the device, and the perceived quality of the virtual experience while either using the NUI or the traditional interface. The results appear controversial and call for further investigation: (a) contrary to our hypothesis, the specific NUI used led to lower performance than the traditional interface; (b) however, the NUI was evaluated as more natural and embodied. The final part of the paper discusses the possible causes underlying these results that suggest possible future improvements of the NUI.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, they can provide haptic feedback without requiring the operators to look away from the screen. Rupp et al (2013) compared the performance of an Xbox 360 gamepad to that of a joystick and keyboard to remotely control an unmanned vehicle. The results showed that the gamepad was easier to use, which was operationalised as lower error rates and lower workload, as well as higher usability scores.…”

Section: Control Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remote operation of Connected and Automated Vehicles

Kalaiyarasan¹,

Simpson²,

Jenkins³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs) offer numerous societal benefits; however, there is still a long way to go before CAVs can be considered reliable and safe. Even when CAV technology has matured, and is more readily available, there will be scenarios that require human intervention such as system failures, situations outside of the AV’s Operational Design Domain (ODD), or to support users. As part of project Endeavour, TRL conducted research on potential human intervention scenarios, which has been considered and referred to as a part of ‘remote operation’. This study sought to understand the current roles of the in-vehicle Safety Driver and Test Assistant during CAV trials and testing to recognise the technical challenges of removing the roles and enabling remote operation. This report includes findings from a literature review and stakeholder engagement and contains: Information on the roles and responsibilities of the in-vehicle Safety Driver and Test Assistant and their remote counterparts Current terminology used in the CAV space, and recommended terms for remote operation Use cases and recommendations to enable safe remote operation A high-level roadmap describing the milestones to enable remote operation in the UK

show abstract

Comparing the Performance, Workload, and Usability of a Gamepad and Joystick in a Complex Task

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Effects of Transparency and Controller Type on Performance in A Multi-Layer Display

Effects of Transparency and Controller Type on Performance in A Multi-Layer Display

A Natural Human-Drone Embodied Interface: Empirical Comparison With a Traditional Interface

Remote operation of Connected and Automated Vehicles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About