1 Introduction and Motivation |
|
1 | (4) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
2 Assessing the Quality and Usability of Multimodal Systems |
|
5 | (14) |
|
2.1 Taxonomy of Quality Aspects of Multimodal Interfaces |
|
|
6 | (5) |
|
2.1.1 Emotions and Affect in the Context of Multimodal Interaction |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
2.1.2 Locating the Quality Aspects in Focus of this Work |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
|
11 | (8) |
|
2.2.1 Interaction Parameters |
|
|
12 | (2) |
|
2.2.2 Evaluation Methods Involving Participants |
|
|
14 | (4) |
|
2.2.3 Measuring Affect and Emotions |
|
|
18 | (1) |
3 System Feedback on Mobile Devices |
|
19 | (10) |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
|
22 | (2) |
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
|
23 | (1) |
|
3.2.3 Effectiveness of Auditory Feedback |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
|
24 | (2) |
|
3.4 Audio-Tactile Feedback |
|
|
26 | (3) |
4 Experimental Paradigm to Examine the Affective Quality and Functional Connotation of Feedback in Different Contexts |
|
29 | (8) |
|
4.1 Self-assessment Manikin |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
4.2 Functional Applicability |
|
|
30 | (1) |
|
|
31 | (3) |
|
4.4 Setup and General Procedure |
|
|
34 | (3) |
5 Affective Quality and Functional Connotation of Auditory Feedback |
|
37 | (14) |
|
5.1 Focus Groups and Association Study with Auditory Feedback |
|
|
37 | (5) |
|
|
37 | (2) |
|
|
39 | (3) |
|
5.2 Influence of Context on the Perception of Auditory Icons and Earcons |
|
|
42 | (9) |
|
5.2.1 Participants and Material |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
44 | (5) |
|
|
49 | (2) |
6 Affective Quality and Functional Connotation of Tactile Feedback |
|
51 | (14) |
|
6.1 Pilot Study to Investigate a Selection of Vibrotactile Feedback |
|
|
51 | (4) |
|
6.1.1 Participants and Material |
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
6.2 Influence of Context on the Perception of Tactons |
|
|
55 | (10) |
|
6.2.1 Participants and Material |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
|
56 | (1) |
|
|
56 | (6) |
|
|
62 | (3) |
7 Affective Quality and Functional Connotation of Auditory-Tactile Feedback |
|
65 | (14) |
|
7.1 Participants and Material |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
|
67 | (8) |
|
7.3.1 Affective Impression |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
7.3.2 Functional Connotation |
|
|
68 | (2) |
|
|
70 | (3) |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
|
73 | (2) |
|
|
75 | (4) |
8 Investigating Different Types of Feedback in a Mobile Interaction Paradigm |
|
79 | (20) |
|
|
79 | (7) |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
8.1.2 Hypotheses and Research Questions |
|
|
80 | (2) |
|
8.1.3 Material and Participants |
|
|
82 | (2) |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
|
86 | (10) |
|
8.2.1 Affective and General Feedback Impression |
|
|
86 | (2) |
|
|
88 | (3) |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
8.2.4 Errors and Corrections |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (4) |
|
|
96 | (3) |
|
8.3.1 Is Bimodal and Trimodal Feedback Rated Better Than Unimodal Feedback? |
|
|
96 | (3) |
9 Conclusion and Future Work |
|
99 | (8) |
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
|
103 | (1) |
|
|
104 | (3) |
Appendix A: Description of Feedback Messages Used in the Context Studies |
|
107 | (8) |
Appendix B: Description of Feedback Messages in the PIN Interaction Study |
|
115 | (4) |
Appendix C: Additional Data to the Results of the PIN Interaction Study |
|
119 | (4) |
References |
|
123 | |