1. Suzanne Kieffer, Adrien Coyette, Jean Vanderdonckt Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium {suzanne.kieffer, adrien.coyette, jean.vanderdonckt}@uclouvain.be Berlin, Germany – June 19-23, 2010

2.  A design tool for the user interface prototyping Multi-stroke bi-directional sketching of representations Object recognition based on a graphical grammar Multiple gesture representations of the same object Multiple levels of fidelity http://www.usixml.org/, funded by - ITEA2 Call 3 – Ref. 2008026 - Eureka Project 3674 2 EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany ∑ ! 3674

3. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 3 DENIM: Lin et al., CHI’2000 JavaSketchIt: Caetano et al., 2002 Gabbeh: Naghsh et al., DSVIS’2005 SILK: Landay & Myers, 1995 InkKit: Plimmer et al., CHI’2004 SketchRead: Alvarado, 2004

4. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 4

5. 5 1: none 2: low 3: medium 4: high

6. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 6

7.  Experiment 1 (XP1) Determine the most preferred and drawn gestural representations for each object depending on the user type (designer vs standard user)  Experiment 2 (XP2) Study the potential influence of the level of fidelity on the sketching task EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 7

8.  2 groups of 30 subjects Designers: people with relevant experience in computer science and user interface design End-users: people without any prior knowledge in computer science or user interface design  Involve the end-user early in the software development life-cycle EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 8

9.  1 st phase Catalogue of 32 widgets How do participants sketch the widgets?  Widget representations  2 nd phase Categories of representations How do participants rank the representations?  Most common object representation EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 9

10. 10

12.  Experiment 1 (XP1) Determine the most preferred and drawn gestural representations for each object depending on the user type (designer vs standard user)  Experiment 2 (XP2) Study the potential influence of the level of fidelity on the sketching task EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 12

13.  Usability study of the potential influence of widget representation complexity on user performances  Measures and usability criteria Speed (efficiency) Accuracy (effectiveness) EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 13

14. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 14

15.  Participants: 11 volunteers (22<age<28) with significant pen-based interaction experience  Task: series of widget sketches with a constant rotation between the widget and the fidelity level  Setup: 4 fidelity levels x 12 widgets x 2 iterations EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 15

16. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 16 21-inch Wacom Cintiq 21UX touch screen flat panel

17.  Fidelity level has no influence on user speed and accuracy  Interpretation: users do not change their sketching strategy whatever the fidelity level is  Widget representation has a highly significant effect on user speed and accuracy  Further investigation: which specific widget characteristics lead to such a statistical difference  Widget classification according to relevant characteristics based on recursive partitioning and recognition rate EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 17

18. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 18

19. EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 19 One-Way ANOVA Procedure Variables: sketching times & delete operations

20.  Basic widgets Label, text field, picture (2 shapes) Check-box, radio button (juxtaposition)  Complex widgets Button, text area (inclusion) Slider (intersection) Combo box, list box, progress bar, and toggle button (complex inclusion) EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 20

21.  2 experiments Identification of the preferred representations Complexity analysis of widget representations EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 21

22.  The level of fidelity has no impact on the sketching of any individual widget  The quality of the recognition depends on the type of widget representation  Any representation of an object to be sketched should minimize the amount of constraints (e.g. inclusion, intersection, sequence) EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 22

23.  Naturalness supports creative design process  Non-obtrusion avoids disturbing the designer during the prototyping phase  Continuity during drawing improves and facilitates the prototyping task  Recovery enables the re-use of previous material EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 23

24.  FP7 Human project  ITEA2 Call 3 UsiXML project  Contact information suzanne.kieffer adrien.coyette @uclouvain.be jean.vanderdonckt EICS2010, 19–23 June 2010, Berlin, Germany 24