Design of human-centric adaptive multimodal interfaces

Kong, Jun; Zhang, W. Y.; Yu, Na; Xia, Xin

doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2011.07.006

Cited by 32 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An example of a successful modality combination was suggested by Elliott et al (2010), who concluded that a visual display supports where the user is with respect to waypoints and a tactile display supports staying on course. Alternatively, automatic modality adaptation (i.e., adapting a multimodal interface to different interaction contexts) could be considered (Kong et al, 2011).…”

Section: Multimodal Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Field evaluation of a wearable multimodal soldier navigation system

Aaltonen

Laarni

2017

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Multimodal Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Field evaluation of a wearable multimodal soldier navigation system

Aaltonen

Laarni

2017

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…al [6] proposed a framework based on human-centric adaptation. This paper quantifies the average user preference of a modality under an interaction context.…”

Section: Human Centric Adaptive Multimodal Interface Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Kong et. al [6] was proposed a framework which describe an adaptation of multimodal interface based on user preferences and interaction context but not focused on augmented reality environment. Duarte et.…”

Section: A Framework For M3i: Mobile Multimodal Interactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive multimodal interaction in mobile augmented reality: A conceptual framework

Abidin

Arshad

Shukri

2017

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although researchers have examined the relationship between usability and context by expressing usability as depending on the context of use (Kong, Zhang, Yu, & Xia, 2011), they have also recognized the difficulties of testing and evaluating usability in the correct context (Ovaska, 1991). To overcome these difficulties, they have developed tools and measuring techniques to enable usability evaluation and testing in the "correct" context (Bevan & Macleod, 1994).…”

Section: Usability In User Interfaces Vs Sociomaterials Quasi-objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociomaterial Quasi-objects: From Interface to Experience

Hylving¹

2017

THCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In this paper, I examine design practices by contrasting the Cartesian view of separation with an ontological perspective and argue for a dynamic, multiple, and entangled world (namely, sociomateriality). In the digital era we live in, sociomateriality helps move design practices forward in order to embrace constant changes and reconfigurations. The word interface manifests a worldview of separation. Researchers typically conceive an interface as belonging to an artifact; that is, the technology, the material. More so, [people] typically considers user interfaces as the layer that separates and connects the technology and the user, which enables interaction. I recognize the limitations of the well-established perspective of interface design and contrast two traditional HCI concepts (namely, usability and context) from a Cartesian versus a sociomaterial perspective. However, to embrace and capitalize on the emergent digital reality, we need a new vocabulary. I introduce helpful concepts that one can use when designing and talking about experiences, and I ground the concepts in a sociomaterial ontological perspective. The concepts and design approach presented in this paper invite and encourage researchers to focus on experiences as sociomaterial entanglements and re-configurations and not as separated social and material entities. By using Michel Serres ' (1980) term quasi-objects, I call attention to the complexity of sociomaterial entanglements that make up experiences and emphasize a holistic and inclusive design approach. In addition, introducing sociomaterial concepts, such as agential cuts and intra-actions, into the human-computer interaction domain invites researchers to think and act in new ways in the era of digitalized experiences. I examine the benefits of the sociomaterial design approach and present practical guidelines on how to approach experiential design with a sociomaterial take.

show abstract

Design of human-centric adaptive multimodal interfaces

Cited by 32 publications

References 33 publications

Field evaluation of a wearable multimodal soldier navigation system

Field evaluation of a wearable multimodal soldier navigation system

Adaptive multimodal interaction in mobile augmented reality: A conceptual framework

Sociomaterial Quasi-objects: From Interface to Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About