How Users Associate Wireless Devices
How Users Associate Wireless DevicesMing Ki Chong
([email protected])Hans Gellersen ([email protected])
CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada12
2Which of these devices are connected?Wired connectionWireless
connection
3
A laptop, 3 mobile phones, and a tablet computer.
Cable is obvious, but wireless is no long physical
Without a visual clue, people are required to establish the
connection by interacting with the interfaces of the devicesSo, it
depends on the Interaction technique and User
interface3IntroductionDevice associationIdeally, an association
should beQuick & EasyNo preparationWithout
InstructionsSpontaneous interactionE.g., printing a document in a
public environment
4Device association, or pairing, or coupling.Need a virtual
connectionNave users want everything to be done in the simplest
way. I.e., Things should connect automaticallyBut that is dangerous
because of accidental connectionSo, it always needs a user
Ideally, an association should be intuitiveQuick & EasyNo
preparationWithout Instructions
So we can connect devices spontaneously, which is enabled by
wireless technology.
It is important to examine the types of actions that people
would spontaneously perform to connect devices.
4QuestionWhat types of actions do people spontaneously produce
to associate wireless devices?How would you do it?5
Second point: How would you do it?A quick mental experiment:
Regardless of what you know, imagine how you would want to
associate them.What is the most intuitive way?Some may say
Bluetooth, some people might disagree5Some examples
Synchronous Gestures (Hinckley, 2003)
Spatial Alignment. Pointing a laser (Mayrhofer, 2007)
Pen Gestures. Stitching (Hinckley, 2004)6
Shaking. Shake well before use (Mayrhofer, 2009)
Proximity (Rekimoto, 2003)And, lots more
Many methods, some were driven by usability, other were driven
by technology or security.
This is what research has suggested, what about the users?
Do people propose the same ideas? Do they expect the same
things?6MethodologyUser-defined actionsSimilar to Wobbrock et al.
(2009) and Kray et al. (2010)Spontaneous actions, i.e., without
premeditation and no hints18 non-technical participants (9 , 9
)
7We conducted a user study to find out! We let people tell us
how they would associate devices.
Without premeditation. Users were not given any information
beforehand.
Spontaneous: using intuition7Generic Prototypes12 types of
wireless devicesWe made low-fi plastic props with minimal user
interfaces8
(Left) Interactive Display(Right, top row) Tablet Computer,
Keyboard(Second row) Media player, Digital Camera, Microphone,
Mouse, Handheld Projector (Bottom row) Digital Watch, Mobile Phone,
Gaming Device, HeadphonesAbstract generic interfaces. Provide the
look-and-feel of the representing devices, but not actual
functionalities.
We used generic prototypes to avoid the participants to be
influenced or misled by the interfaces of existing commercial
products.8Setup37 combinations of devices30 pairings7 groups of 3
or moreSelected 3 primary devicesMobile PhoneTablet
ComputerInteractive DisplayAt least one primary in each
combination9
LibraryEnvironment10CameraParticipantPlastic PropsConductor*A
mock-up picture of the user study setup.Quiet environment
1 on 1 user study per session
10Video : Mobile Phone + Handheld Projector
11Handheld ProjectorMobile PhoneVideo examples of the user
study
Give context before starting the videoPairing a mobile phone
with a handheld projector
The participant points the projector at the phone and shines a
beam of light.The phone is then able to record the data sent from
the projector.11Video : Interactive Display + Wireless Keyboard
12Interactive DisplayWireless KeyboardGive context before
starting the video
Pairing a wireless keyboard with an interactive display
Take a USB stick out of the keyboard.Plug the USB stick into the
display.And they connect.12ResultsCollected 752 instances36 unique
actions. For example:13
Docking
Hanging
Physical Contact
Pointing
Snap a picture
SwipingDevice TouchBriefly explain the actions
2nd iteration: Docking and Physical Contact, both have the same
characteristic that the devices must touch13Twelve categoriesThe
top five categories Search & SelectProximityButton EventDevice
TouchGestureNot a single category with a large proportion5 large
shares14
Overall occurrences of the twelve categoriesExplain how the
categories were found!The second iteration
Explain the top 5 categoriesSearch & SelectProximityButton
EventDevice TouchGesture14
Total number of occurrences37 Device Combinations3 or moreMobile
PhoneTablet ComputerInteractive DisplayMultiple Devices
Total number of occurrences12 CategoriesTop Five CategoriesThe
numbers represent instances = 752
Horizontally:37 device combinationsGrouped by the primary
devicesA row = a device combination
Vertically:12 categoriesA column = a type of action15
Mobile PhoneTablet ComputerInteractive DisplayMultiple
DevicesWireless Headset 3 4 1 5 3 - - 1 - 1 1 -Peoples choices
varies.
For each row, no single category achieves over 50% dominance.
High variance.It indicates that different people have different
ideas.16
Mobile PhoneTablet ComputerInteractive DisplayMultiple
DevicesHighest numbers
onlyProximityProjectorProjectorProjectorProjectorGestureSearch
& SelectMobile: search & selectPeople are already used to
Bluetooth
Multiple: search & selectCould be people dont want to
interact with too many devices. Rather interact with one, and use
search and selectToo difficult to think of a technique that can fit
all of the devices17
Mobile PhoneTablet ComputerInteractive DisplayMultiple
DevicesTokenToken was not suggested by the participants when
pairing devices with a mobile phonePhysical token was not found in
researchPhysical token is closest to using a cable18Discussion /
ReflectionPeople have many ideasCommercial products have
adoptedsearch & select, bumping, device touchOverlaps between
researchers and users, but not always in harmony,
e.g.:ShakingPhysical Token
People have different ideas about associating wireless
devicesNot one category had achieved dominance in any of the device
combinations
Commercial productsBesides using the commercial techniques,
people also have their own ideas of how devices should be
associated
Overlaps:Shaking: research shows it is very intuitive, but our
results show that it is not spontaneously obvious to usersToken:
Our participants have suggested the use of tokens, but no research
has suggested the use of a physical token for
association19SummaryPresented a study of user-defined actions for
spontaneous device associationNo single favourite action, instead
five dominant categories were foundThe data we have is a snapshot
of peoples current view
205 categories:Search & select, Proximity, Gesture, Device
Touch, Button Event
Snapshot: A snapshot of the current generation of wireless
usersas new interaction techniques are introduced, peoples
expectation will change over time.With a better understanding of
the users, we expect new methods will be designedSo, we expect our
results to influence future design
-Final unofficial take home message, It is a bit freaky with
this wireless technology
20
