Calendar

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 29

Boston UXPA Usability and UX Conf. 2013

May 25

“ Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking of them. ”

-- Alfred North Whitehead

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

Mary E. Dominessy

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by Mary E. Dominessy (bibliography)

1988

Edit | Del

Smyth, Christopher C. and Dominessy, Mary E. (1988): Comparing Oculometer and Head-Fixed Reticle with Voice or Switch for Tactical Display Interaction. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting 1988. pp. 116-120.

“An experiment with 15 U.S. Army enlisted military subjects was conducted to compare the performance of an oculometer, head-fixed reticle, and touch panel for data entry on a generic tactical air combat display. The subjects used voice or switch to designate data items on the display that were selected with the oculometer or fixed reticle. The touch panel was included as a standard data entry device. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference in performance for the five configurations at the .0001 level. The reticle/switch, oculometer/switch, and touch panel are significantly faster than the reticle/voice, which in turn is significantly faster than the oculometer/voice. The reticle methods are faster than the oculometer methods. The switch action is faster than voice entry. The touch panel is twice as accurate as the other methods, all of which have about the same spatial accuracy whether oculometer or reticle, voice or switch. However, the oculometer/voice has nearly twice as many selection errors as the other methods.”

Add publication