halo patrick baudisch microsoft research LDUX ruth rosenholtz
halo patrick baudisch, microsoft research, LDUX* & ruth rosenholtz, parc, ASD april 10 th, CHI 2003 *while at xerox parc, now parc inc.
the problem +
halo <demo>
contents halo is not a focus plus context technique (related work) halo is a lamp shining onto the street (designing halo) halo is 16 -33% faster than arrow-based visualization techniques (user study) build interactive halo applications! (conclusions, lessons learned)
related work driving directions vs. route planning aids overview-plus-detail focus-plus-context pointing into off-screen space
halo design
cinematography 1. entry and exit points 2. point of view arrow-based techniques 3. partially out of the frame halo rings are familiar, graceful degradation
streetlamps aura visible from distance aura is round overlapping auras aggregate fading of aura indicates distance what we changed smooth transition sharp edge disks rings dark background light background
reserve space for content intrusion border handle space for arcs… and for corner arcs
arc length = distance
handling many objects find best (restaurant): relevance cut-off see all (dangers): merge arcs
app designers can use color texture arc thickness
user study
interfaces arc/arrow fading off scale 110 -300 m/cm map as backdrop readability ok same selectable size hypothesis: halo faster legend halo ring distance from display border
pre-study to define tasks 8 participants (6 GPS users, 2 PDA users) informal interviews 10 -40 minutes 4 tasks to be used in study
1. locate task had to simulate on PC click at expected location of off-screen targets
2. closest task click arrow/arc or off-screen location closest to car
3. traverse task click all five targets so as to form shortest path
4. avoid task click on hospital farthest away from traffic jams
procedure 12 participants within subject design, counterbalanced four training maps per interface/task, then eight timed maps questionnaire
task completion time 16% 33% Task Locate Closest Traverse Avoid Arrow interface 20. 1 (7. 3) 9. 9 (10. 1) 20. 6 (14. 1) 9. 2 (4. 7) Halo interface 16. 8 (6. 7) 6. 6 (5. 3) 16. 8 (8. 7) 7. 7 (5. 8)
error rate Task Arrow interface Halo interface Locate 23. 5 pixels (21. 6) 28. 4 pixels (33. 8) Closest 22% (42%) 21% (41%) Traverse 97. 4 pixels (94. 7) 81. 0 pixels (96. 7) Avoid 15% (35%) 14% (34%) participants underestimated distances by 26% participants saw ovals (gestalt laws? ) we can compensate for that: width += 35%
subjective preference
conclusions halo 16%-33% faster than arrows – – – no split attention distortion-free space scale independent no need to annotate distance perceive all rings at once [treisman & gormican] limitation: max number or rings future work: applications where peripheral objects move and change
Thanks! try halo: http: //www. patrickbaudisch. com/projects/halo polle zellweger, jock mackinlay, lance good, and mark stefik ( “citylights” short paper talk) scott minneman and allison woodruff
end
Extra
(a) locate (c) traverse (b) closest (d) avoid
- Slides: 28