Smith Amanda L, Chaparro Barbara S
Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas
Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas.
Hum Factors. 2015 Sep;57(6):1015-28. doi: 10.1177/0018720815575644. Epub 2015 Mar 20.
User performance, perceived usability, and preference for five smartphone text input methods were compared with younger and older novice adults.
Smartphones are used for a variety of functions other than phone calls, including text messaging, e-mail, and web browsing. Research comparing performance with methods of text input on smartphones reveals a high degree of variability in reported measures, procedures, and results. This study reports on a direct comparison of five of the most common input methods among a population of younger and older adults, who had no experience with any of the methods.
Fifty adults (25 younger, 18-35 years; 25 older, 60-84 years) completed a text entry task using five text input methods (physical Qwerty, onscreen Qwerty, tracing, handwriting, and voice). Entry and error rates, perceived usability, and preference were recorded.
Both age groups input text equally fast using voice input, but older adults were slower than younger adults using all other methods. Both age groups had low error rates when using physical Qwerty and voice, but older adults committed more errors with the other three methods. Both younger and older adults preferred voice and physical Qwerty input to the remaining methods. Handwriting consistently performed the worst and was rated lowest by both groups.
Voice and physical Qwerty input methods proved to be the most effective for both younger and older adults, and handwriting input was the least effective overall.
These findings have implications to the design of future smartphone text input methods and devices, particularly for older adults.
比较年轻和年长的新手成年人对五种智能手机文本输入方法的用户表现、感知可用性和偏好。
智能手机除了用于通话外，还用于多种功能，包括短信、电子邮件和网页浏览。比较智能手机文本输入方法性能的研究表明，报告的测量方法、程序和结果存在高度变异性。本研究报告了在年轻和年长成年人中对五种最常见输入方法的直接比较，这些成年人对任何一种方法都没有经验。
五十名成年人（25名年轻人，18 - 35岁；25名年长者，60 - 84岁）使用五种文本输入方法（实体全键盘、屏幕全键盘、触控、手写和语音）完成文本输入任务。记录输入和错误率、感知可用性和偏好。
两个年龄组使用语音输入时输入文本的速度相同，但年长者使用所有其他方法时比年轻人慢。两个年龄组在使用实体全键盘和语音时错误率较低，但年长者使用其他三种方法时错误更多。年轻人和年长者都更喜欢语音和实体全键盘输入，而不是其他方法。手写始终表现最差，两组对其评价都最低。
语音和实体全键盘输入方法对年轻人和年长者都被证明是最有效的，而手写输入总体上是最无效的。
这些发现对未来智能手机文本输入方法和设备的设计有影响，特别是对年长者。
