[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/2702123.2702300acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

How Much Faster is Fast Enough?: User Perception of Latency & Latency Improvements in Direct and Indirect Touch

Published: 18 April 2015 Publication History

Abstract

This paper reports on two experiments designed to further our understanding of users' perception of latency in touch- based systems. The first experiment extends previous efforts to measure latency perception by reporting on a unified study in which direct and indirect form-factors are compared for both tapping and dragging tasks. Our results show significant effects from both form-factor and task, and inform system designers as to what input latencies they should aim to achieve in a variety of system types. A follow-up experiment investigates peoples' ability to perceive small improvements to latency in direct and indirect form-factors for tapping and dragging tasks. Our results provide guidance to system designers of the relative value of making improvements in latency that reduce but do not fully eliminate lag from their systems.

Supplementary Material

suppl.mov (pn0922-file3.mp4)
Supplemental video
MP4 File (p1827-deber.mp4)

References

[1]
Allison, R.S., Harris, L.R., Jenkin, M., Jasiobedzka, U., and Zacher, J.E. (2001). Tolerance of Temporal Delay in Virtual Environments. In Proc. IEEE VR '01, 247--254.
[2]
Anderson, G., Doherty, R., and Ganapathy, S. (2011). User Perception of Touch Screen Latency. In Proc. Design, User Experience, and Usability (DUXU) '11, 195--202.
[3]
Annett, M., Ng, A., Dietz, P., Bischof, W.F., and Gupta, A. (2014). How Low Should We Go? Understanding the Perception of LatencyWhile Inking. In Proc. GI '14,167--174.
[4]
Cheshire, S. (1996). Latency and the Quest for Interactivity. White paper for the Synchronous Person-toPerson Interactive Computing Env Meeting, Nov. 1996.
[5]
Ellis, S.R., Bréant, F., Manges, B., Jacoby, R., and Adelstein, B.D. (1997). Factors Influencing Operator Interaction with Virtual Objects Viewed via Head-Mounted See-Through Displays: Viewing Conditions and Rendering Latency. In Proc. IEEE VR '97, 138--145.
[6]
Ellis, S.R., Young, M.J., Adelstein, B.D., and Ehrlich, S.M. (1999). Discrimination of Changes of Latency During Voluntary Hand Movements of Virtual Objects. In Proc. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society '99, 1182--1186.
[7]
Harris, L., Harrar, V., Jaekl, P., and Kopinska, A. (2010). Mechanisms of Simultaneity Constancy. In Nijhawan, R., and Khurana, B. (Eds.). Space and Time in Perception and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 232--253.
[8]
Jota, R., Ng, A., Dietz, P., and Wigdor, D. (2013). How Fast is Fast Enough? A Study of the Effects of Latency in DirectTouch Pointing Tasks. In Proc. CHI '13, 2291--2300.
[9]
Kaaresoja, T., and Brewster, S. (2010). Feedback is Late: Measuring Multimodal Delays in Mobile Device Touchscreen Interaction. In Proc. ICMI '10, Article 2, 8 pages.
[10]
Kaaresoja, T., Brewster, S., and Lantz, V. (2014). Towards the Temporally Perfect Virtual Button: Touch-Feedback Simultaneity and Perceived Quality in Mobile Touchscreen Press Interactions. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 11, 2, Article 9 (Jun. 2014), 25 pages.
[11]
Kaernbach, C. (1991). Simple Adaptive Testing with the Weighted Up-Down Method. Perception & Psychophysics 49, 3 (Mar. 1991), 227--229.
[12]
Leigh, D., Forlines, C., Jota, R., Sanders, S., and Wigdor, D. (2014). High-Rate, Low-Latency Multi-Touch Sensing with Simultaneous Orthogonal Multiplexing. In Proc. UIST '14, 355--364.
[13]
Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J. Acoustical Soc. of Am. 49, 2 (Feb. 1971), 467--477.
[14]
MacKenzie, I.S., and Ware, C. (1993). Lag as a Determinant of Human Performance in Interactive Systems. In Proc. CHI '93, 488--493.
[15]
Meehan, M., Razzaque, S., Whitton, M.C., and Brooks, F.P. (2003). Effect of Latency on Presence in Stressful Virtual Environments. In Proc. IEEE VR '03, 141--138.
[16]
Miller, R.B. (1968). Response Time in Man-Computer Conversational Transactions. In Proc. AFIPS '68, 267--277.
[17]
Nelson, W.T., Roe, M.M., Bolia, R.S., and Morley, R.M. (1998). Assessing Simulator Sickness in a See-Through HMD: Effects of Time Delay, Time on Task, and Task Complexity. In Proc. IMAGE '00.
[18]
Ng, A., Annett, M., Dietz, P., Gupta, A., and Bischof, W.F. (2014). In the Blink of an Eye: Investigating Latency Perception During Stylus Interaction. In Proc. CHI '14, 1103--1112.
[19]
Ng, A., Lepinski, J., Wigdor, D., Sanders, S., and Dietz, P. (2012). Designing for Low-Latency Direct-Touch Input. In Proc. UIST '12, 453--464.
[20]
Pavlovych, A., and Gutwin C. (2012). Assessing Target Acquisition and Tracking Performance for Moving Targets in the Presence of Latencyand Jitter. In Proc. GI '12, 109--116.
[21]
Pavlovych, A., and Stürzlinger, W. (2011). Target Following Performance in the Presence of Latency, Jitter, and Signal Dropouts. In Proc. GI '11, 33--40.
[22]
Pavlovych, A., and Stürzlinger, W. (2009). The Tradeoff between Spatial Jitter and Latency in Pointing Tasks. In Proc. ACM EICS '09, 187--196.
[23]
Savage, W.C. (1970). The Measurement of Sensation: A Critique of Perceptual Psychophysics. Berkley: UC Press.
[24]
So, R.H.Y., and Chung, G.K.M. (2005). Sensory Motor Responses in Virtual Environments: Studying the Effects of Image Latencies for Target-directed Hand Movement. In Proc. IEEE-EMBS '05, 5006--5008.
[25]
Steed, A. (2008). A Simple Method for Estimating the Latency of Interactive, Real-Time Graphics Simulations. In Proc. ACM VRST '08, 123--129.
[26]
Teather, R., Pavlovych, A., Stürzlinger, W., and MacKenzie, I.S. (2009). Effects of Tracking Technology, Latency, and Spatial Jitter on Object Movement. In Proc. 3DUI '09, 43--50.
[27]
Vogels, I.M.L.C. (2004). Detectionof Temporal Delays in Visual-Haptic Interfaces. Hum. Fact. 46, 1 (Spr. 2004), 118--134.
[28]
Ware, C., and Balakrishnan, R. (1994). Reaching for Objects in VR Displays: Lag and Frame Rate. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 1, 4 (Dec. 1994), 331--356.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Measuring the Just Noticeable Difference for Audio LatencyProceedings of the 19th International Audio Mostly Conference: Explorations in Sonic Cultures10.1145/3678299.3678331(325-331)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2024
  • (2024)A take on latency measurement for vision systemsInfrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XXXV10.1117/12.3018001(25)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Performance Comparison of EDHOC and DTLS 1.3 in Internet-of-Things Environments2024 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC)10.1109/WCNC57260.2024.10570830(1-6)Online publication date: 21-Apr-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. How Much Faster is Fast Enough?: User Perception of Latency & Latency Improvements in Direct and Indirect Touch

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 2015
    4290 pages
    ISBN:9781450331456
    DOI:10.1145/2702123
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 18 April 2015

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. direct vs indirect input
    2. jnd study
    3. latency
    4. multi-touch
    5. touch

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    CHI '15
    Sponsor:
    CHI '15: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 18 - 23, 2015
    Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Acceptance Rates

    CHI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 486 of 2,120 submissions, 23%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

    Upcoming Conference

    CHI 2025
    ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 26 - May 1, 2025
    Yokohama , Japan

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)135
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15
    Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Measuring the Just Noticeable Difference for Audio LatencyProceedings of the 19th International Audio Mostly Conference: Explorations in Sonic Cultures10.1145/3678299.3678331(325-331)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2024
    • (2024)A take on latency measurement for vision systemsInfrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XXXV10.1117/12.3018001(25)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Performance Comparison of EDHOC and DTLS 1.3 in Internet-of-Things Environments2024 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC)10.1109/WCNC57260.2024.10570830(1-6)Online publication date: 21-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Finger-Tapping Motion Recognition Based on Skin Surface Deformation Using Wrist-Mounted Piezoelectric Film SensorsIEEE Sensors Journal10.1109/JSEN.2024.338633324:11(17876-17884)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
    • (2023)Effects of Text Input Latency on Performance and Task LoadProceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia10.1145/3626705.3627784(99-107)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2023
    • (2023)Single-tap Latency Reduction with Single- or Double- tap PredictionProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36042717:MHCI(1-26)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2023
    • (2023)Predicting Mouse Positions Beyond a System’s Latency Can Increase Throughput and User Experience in Linear Steering TasksProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202310.1145/3603555.3603556(101-115)Online publication date: 3-Sep-2023
    • (2023)Managing Delays in Human-Robot InteractionACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction10.1145/356989030:4(1-42)Online publication date: 12-Sep-2023
    • (2023)Prediction of RTT Through Radio-Layer Parameters in 4G/5G Dual-Connectivity Mobile Networks2023 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC)10.1109/ISCC58397.2023.10218091(213-218)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
    • (2022)Intraoperative Needle Tip Tracking with an Integrated Fibre-Optic Ultrasound SensorSensors10.3390/s2223903522:23(9035)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2022
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media