The analysis of the ergonomic mice efficiency for the cursor movement is presented based on the experiments with both self-reported parameters and biometric measurements. The adequacy of choice as well as the overall speed and physical load are examined

Khomiuk, S. G.

Kuzmenko, A. A.

Markina, A. A.

Rabchuk, A. A.

English

Repository of Belarusian National Technical University (BNTU)

124  Рисунок 1 – Программный код мигание светодиода, передающий информацию о слове «эконом»Таким образом, применение данного учебного комплекса дает возможность одновре-менного освоения, закрепления знаний и отработки навыков сразу по нескольким предме-там. В свою очередь, формирование комплексных знаний способствуют развитию системно-сти мышления, учит комплексно подходить к решению реальных практических задач. УДК 004.2 ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF ERGONOMIC MANIPULATORS ON THE CURSOR CONTROL Kuzmenko A.A., Khomiuk S.G., Markina A.A., Rabchuk A.A. Brest State Technical University Abstract. The analysis of the ergonomic mice efficiency for the cursor movement is presented based on the experiments with both self-reported parameters and biometric measurements. The adequacy of choice as well as the overall speed and physical load are examined. The initial design of the computer mouse, including both Xerox prototypes and the vast majority of models of the early 1980s, was focused primarily on engineering solutions, rather than ergonomics. With the evolution of graphical interfaces, this fact increasingly came into strong contradiction with the tendency to refuse keyboard input in favor of pointing devices. Today, the average time of active use of the mouse exceeds the same parameter for the keyboard by almost three times [1]. Ergonomics is even more important for gaming mice, given the periods of intensive use associated with them. When using a typical mouse, the ul-nar and radial bones of the arm are crossed, and this creates problems under regular loads. To mitigate the problems associated with carpal tunnel syndrome, arthritis and other in-juries from repetitive stresses, the design of some modern ergonomic mice makes a turn of the hand at an angle close to a vertical plane to achieve a more natural position. In addition, 125 a number of designs intentionally limit the movement of the wrist. Some manufacturers pro-vide the ability to adjust the shape of the mouse - make removable and/or extendable support for the wrist, support for the thumb and little finger. The vast majority of ergonomic manipu-lators are asymmetric, which is why it is necessary to acquire the correct modification of the product, depending on whether the left or right hand is working. Also, questions of operator productivity remain open when using mice with the listed design solutions. As a result, in combination with lower production volumes (and, therefore, a higher selling price), this does not contribute to their mass adoption. This study is designed to evaluate both the subjective perception of ergonomic mice of var-ious shapes by users and the operator’s efficiency when performing typical cursor movements. Four ergonomic mice, shown in Figure 1, were selected for the study. We used a mouse of a traditional (conservative) design related to the game segment, two vertical mice differing in the type of a grip, and a horizontal mouse with support for the wrist and fingers.    a) b) c) d) e) f) Figure 1 – Mice examined: A4Tech Bloody Ultra Gear mouse (a), Anker Vertical Ergonomic Mouse (b), Hippus Handshoe Mouse (c), Anir Vertical Mouse (d); The testing software (e, f) Test software for studying cursor control during operation showed the “Source” (Fig. 1, e) and “Destination” (Fig. 1) windows containing geometric shapes. The button with the figure in the "Source" window indicates which figure should be found in a 5x5 matrix in the "Desti-nation" window. This step was repeated a predetermined number of times with randomly se-lected shapes. The approach is based on the methodology of the study of memorization and pattern recognition, made by R.M. Granovskaya and Ya. Bereznaya [2]. To study the subjective level of expectations from mice, the usability scale question-naire (SUS) of J. Brook was used [3]. An assessment of the objective level of mastership was studied using the system usability questionnaire (PSSUQ) [4]. Microsoft Desirability Toolkit (Microsoft Reaction Card Method) was used to determine the level of satisfaction [5]. The study involved 50 students 18-23 years old. During the experiment, the operating time was measured, and physical activity was estimated using biometric measurements. Heart rate (HR) was used as an indicator of physical activity. A comparison of the subjective level of expectations, the objective level of mastership and the level of satisfaction made it possible to distinguish three types of product choice for the studied target group (table 1). 126 Table 1 – Types of choice (as a percentage of the number of respondents from the entire sample) Mouse  Type of choice A4Tech Ultra Gear mouseAnker Vertical Ergonomic MouseHippus Handshoe MouseAnir Vertical MouseAdequate  54  40  28  44 Overestimation  12  6  22  14 Underestimation  34  54  50  42 Half of the respondents demonstrate underestimation when working with the Hippus Handshoe Mouse (which turned out to be the most productive manipulator). The traditional gaming mouse, which does not have additional supports, showed the lowest productivity - maximum physical activity with minimum operator speed. The compromise solution (Anker Vertical Ergonomic Mouse, in which the vertical grip is combined with the approximate clas-sical position of the palm) showed itself worse among the vertical manipulators (Fig 2).          Figure 2 – The experiment duration and mean HR values References 1. Odel D., Johnson P. Evaluation of flat, angled, and vertical computer mice and their effects on wrist posture, pointing performance, and preference // Work. – Vol. 52. – No. 2. – 2015. – P. 245–253. 2. Грановская Р.М., Березная И.Я. Запоминание и узнавание фигур. / Л.: Изд-во Ленинградского ун-та., 1974. – 96 с. 3. Tullis T., Albert W. Measuring the User Experience Collection, Analyzing and Pre-senting Usability Metrics – Morgan Kaufmann, 2013. – 320 p. 4. Lewis, J. R. IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires – Psychometric eval-uation and instructions for use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, №7, 1995. – Р. 57–78. 5. Lindgaard G., Dudek C. What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? // Inter-acting with computers, 2003. – Vol. 15, Iss. 3. – P. 429–452. 6. Interacting with computers, 2003. – Vol. 15, Iss. 3. – P. 429–452. УДК 608.2 SAVE WATER SYSTEM Кунцевич В.В., Машонский Д.А., Пинчук М.Н. Филиал БНТУ «Минский государственный политехнический колледж» Abstract. For environmental purposes, namely resource conservation, it is proposed to install a rainwater gathering system. You can collect rainwater by means of the system and use this water for the needs of the trolley fleet (washing of rolling stock). This system reservoirs can be also used for storage of excess filtered water. 050100150200250300 Experiment duration, sA4Tech  Ultra Gear mouseAnker Vertical Ergonomic MouseHippus Handshoe MouseAnir Vertical Mouse 687072747678HR, bpmA4Tech  Ultra Gear mouseAnker Vertical Ergonomic MouseHippus Handshoe MouseAnir Vertical Mouse

Assessing the impact of ergonomic manipulators on the cursor control

https://rep.bntu.by/bitstream/handle/data/73472/124-126.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Assessing the impact of ergonomic manipulators on the cursor control

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Repository of Belarusian National Technical University (BNTU)