Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Peripheral Interaction in Desktop Computing: Why It’s Worth Stepping Beyond Traditional Mouse and Keyboard

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Peripheral Interaction

Part of the book series: Human–Computer Interaction Series ((HCIS))

Abstract

When computers entered our workplaces and other areas of our everyday life, many of the opportunities to use our physical abilities diminished. The macromonotony of large movements in, e.g., line production has become the micromonotony of small movements in computer-based office work. At the same time, looking at our everyday activities that do not involve technology, we naturally make use of our perception and motor abilities and continually interact with our surroundings. Our research has thus focused on achieving similar fluidness in our interactions with the digital world. While traditional desktop work usually involves controlling computers by pressing buttons, dropping menus, and sliding bars, we invite users to act with their physical surroundings, i.e., furniture embodied as handles to actions in the digital world. Based on our research on peripheral embodied interaction through smart furniture and insights from related research, we provide a conceptual overview of the seemingly minor, yet accumulatively powerful, benefits that this interaction style can provide as additional input dimension in desktop settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    As metaphor is largely dependent on culture, their underlying meaning may largely vary across cultures (e.g., progress is right and future is ahead are primarily true for Western countries).

References

  • Bakker, S., Antle, A., & van den Hoven, E. (2011). Embodied metaphors in tangible interaction design. Personal Ubiquitous Computer, 16, 433–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardram, J. (2009). Activity-based computing for medical work in hospitals. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 16, 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, P., Biddle, R., & Noble, J. (2002). A taxonomy of user-interface metaphors. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI-NZ Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction (SIGCHI-NZ ’02) (pp. 25–30). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buxton, W., & Myers, B. (1986). A study in two-handed input. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’86) (pp. 321–326). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. Y., Liang, R. H., Chen, B. Y., et al. (2010). iCon: Utilizing everyday objects as additional, auxiliary and instant tabletop controllers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’10) (pp. 1155–1164). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chewar, C. M., McCrickard, D. S., Ndiwalana, A., et al. (2002). Secondary task display attributes—Optimizing visualizations for cognitive task suitability and interference avoidance. In Symposium on Data Visualization (VISSYM ’02) (pp. 165–171). Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland: Eurographics Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., & Wilhite, S. (2004). A diary study of task switching and interruptions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’04) (pp. 175–182). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djajadiningrat, T., Matthews, B., & Stienstra, M. (2007). Easy doesn’t do it: Skill and expression in tangible aesthetics. Personal Ubiquitous Computer, 11, 657–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edge, D. (2008). Tangible user interfaces for peripheral interaction. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edge, D., & Blackwell, A. (2009). Peripheral tangible interaction by analytic design. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI ’09) (pp. 69–76). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finstad, K., Bink, M., McDaniel, M., & Einstein, G. (2006). Breaks and task switches in prospective memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 705–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishkin, K. (2004). A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces. Personal Ubiquitous Computer, 8, 347–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González, V., & Mark, G. (2004). Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness: Managing multiple working spheres. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’04) (pp. 113–120). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., Boring, S., & Greenberg, S. (2013a). The unadorned desk: Exploiting the physical space around a display as an input canvas. In Proceedings of the 14th IFIP TC13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT ’13) (pp. 140–158). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., Boring, S., Lueling, C., et al. (2012). StaTube: Facilitating state management in instant messaging systems. In TEI 2012 (pp. 283–290).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., & Butz, A. (2011). Extending interaction to the periphery. In Embodied Interaction: Theory and Practice in HCI, Workshop at CHI 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., Richter, H., Hemme, A., & Butz, A. (2013b). Comparing input modalities for peripheral interaction: A case study on peripheral music control. In Proceedings of the 14th IFIP TC13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT ’13) (pp. 162–179).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., Tabard, A., Von Thermann, A. et al. (2014). Evaluating peripheral interaction. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’14) (pp. 21–28). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausen, D., Wagner, C., Boring, S., & Butz, A. (2013c). Comparing modalities and feedback for peripheral interaction. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’13) (pp. 1263–1268).

    Google Scholar 

  • Huynh, K., Stepp, C. E., White, L. W. et al. (2010). Finding a feature on a 3D object through single-digit haptic exploration. In: IEEE Haptics Symposium. IEEE, pp. 83–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iqbal, S., & Horvitz, E. (2007). Disruption and recovery of computing tasks: Field study, analysis, and directions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’07) (pp. 677–686). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, J., & Dabbish, L. (2009). Self-interruption on the computer: A typology of discretionary task interleaving. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’09) (pp. 1799–1808). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karam, M., Schraefel, M. C. (2005a). A study on the use of semaphoric gestures to support secondary task interactions. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’05) (pp. 1961–1964). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karam, M., & Schraefel, M. C. (2005b). A taxonomy of gestures in human computer interaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klemmer, S. R., Hartmann, B., & Takayama, L. (2006). How bodies matter: Five themes for interaction design. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS ’06) (pp. 140–149). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, S. (1987). Hand movements: A window into haptic object recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 342–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. (2010). In search of a natural gesture. XRDS Crossroads, 16, 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J. (2002). Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 16, 679–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, B., Mynatt, E., Voida, S., et al. (2001). Support for multitasking and background awareness using interactive peripheral displays. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’01) (pp. 41–50). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrady, S., & Levine, J. (2009). Sedentariness at work: How much do we really sit? Obesity (Silver Spring), 17, 2103–2105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (2002). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, D., & Igoe, T. (2004). Physical computing: Sensing and controlling the physical world with computers. Thomson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olivera, F., García-Herranz, M., Haya, P., & Llinás, P. (2011). Do not disturb: Physical interfaces for parallel peripheral interactions. In Proceedings of the 13th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT ’11) pp. 479–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, N., Bauman, A., & Brown, W. (2009). Too much sitting: A novel and important predictor of chronic disease risk? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43, 80–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, K., Lindlbauer, D., Greindl, P., et al. (2013). Rotating, tilting, bouncing: Using an interactive chair to promote activity in office environments. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’13) (pp. 79–84). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, K., Lindlbauer, D., Haller, M., et al. (2014a). A chair as ubiquitous input device: Exploring semaphoric chair gestures for focused and peripheral interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’14) (pp. 4097–4106). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, K., Lindlbauer, D., Haller, M., et al. (2014b). Exploring the potential of peripheral interaction through smart furniture. In Peripheral Interaction: Shaping the Research and Design Space, Workshop at CHI 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarr, J., Cockburn, A., & Gutwin, C. (2012). Supporting and exploiting spatial memory in user interfaces. In Foundations and Trends in Human–Computer Interaction (pp. 1–84).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S. (2004). Optimal feedback control and the neural basis of volitional motor control. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 532–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer-interaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, M., & Bowman, D. (2009). Body-based interaction for desktop games. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’09) (pp. 4249–4254).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., Irby, C., Kimball, R., et al. (1982). Designing the star user interface. Byte, 7, 242–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullmer, B., & Ishii, H. (2000). Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces. IBM System Journal, 39, 915–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiser, M. (1996). Designing calm technology. Powergrid J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, P., & Jeannerod, M. (1998). Getting a grasp on coordination. News in Physiological Sciences, 13, 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, C., & McCarley, J. (2007). Applied attention theory. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L., Huang, J., & Bargh, J. (2009). The scaffolded mind: Higher mental processes are grounded in early experience of the physical world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1257–1267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wozny, L. (1989). The application of metaphor, analgoy, and conceptural models in computer systems. Interacting with Computers, 1, 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Media Interaction Lab, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Hagenberg, Upper Austria, Austria

    Kathrin Probst

Authors
  1. Kathrin Probst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin Probst .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Saskia Bakker

  2. Human-Computer Interaction Group, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany

    Doris Hausen

  3. CITRIS, University of California Berkeley, Moffett Field, California, USA

    Ted Selker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Probst, K. (2016). Peripheral Interaction in Desktop Computing: Why It’s Worth Stepping Beyond Traditional Mouse and Keyboard. In: Bakker, S., Hausen, D., Selker, T. (eds) Peripheral Interaction. Human–Computer Interaction Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29523-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29523-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-29521-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-29523-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation