CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computer Systems - CHI '03 2003
DOI: 10.1145/765968.765971
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phrase sets for evaluating text entry techniques

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
186
0
3

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 209 publications
(190 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
186
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, ZoomBoard that showed the highest CPM in the previous studies might be comparable to VSQ because the experimental conditions of VSQ and ZoomBoard were quite similar. Prototypes in these researches for the experiments were carried out on tablets including MS Surface Pro 3 and Apple iPad 3 but not on the smartwatches, and also used the same phrase sets by MacKenzie and Soukoreff (2003) for the text entry tasks. Therefore, we can deduce that ZoomBoard was conducted in comparable experimental conditions compared to previous studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, ZoomBoard that showed the highest CPM in the previous studies might be comparable to VSQ because the experimental conditions of VSQ and ZoomBoard were quite similar. Prototypes in these researches for the experiments were carried out on tablets including MS Surface Pro 3 and Apple iPad 3 but not on the smartwatches, and also used the same phrase sets by MacKenzie and Soukoreff (2003) for the text entry tasks. Therefore, we can deduce that ZoomBoard was conducted in comparable experimental conditions compared to previous studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the experiment, data collection began with the first selection blink for each phrase and ended upon completion of that phrase. The phrases were chosen randomly from a standard set of 500 phrases used for evaluating text entry systems [20]. Phrase lengths ranged from 16 characters to 43 characters (mean = 28.6).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One trial consisted of entering twenty words, randomly selected from a set of 150 words, and displayed one at a time at the top line on the screen of the experimenter. The words were taken from the list of the Words Frequencies [26] according to the recommendations from [15], and by taking into account that the test subjects were not native English speakers.…”
Section: Procedures For Testing the Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%