"Mobile, Handheld Devices with Touchscreens: How Perceived Usability Affects Communication"

Rebecca Birch 

Rebecca is a New Mexico Tech graduate who recently discovered the joys of tutoring and mentoring high school students in mathematics and language arts. While working with her students, Rebecca has learned much about the nuances of touchscreen technology and the role it plays in their communication. Other tactile activities include rock climbing, playing the viola, and enhancing her side work as a photographer.

Contents

Abstract

Introduction

Literature Review

Survey

Discussion on HTDs in Regard to Literature and Survey

Considerations and the Future of HTDs

Works Cited

Appendix A

Considerations and the Future of HTDs

Considerations for HTD Functions

Both the survey and the literature indicated that tasks involving simple text entry were more frequently performed than those involving complex text entry, that simpler, more intuitive GUI were preferred, and that haptic feedback would be helpful. In general, e-mail and Web browsing on HTDs were not as popular as sending text messages or making phone calls by roughly 20%.

The survey results and literature call two questions into consideration:

• Why are e-mail and Web browsing less popular?
• Are these functions unnecessary or poorly designed?

And, following, if e-mail and Web browsing functions are unnecessary or poorly designed, what can be done to necessitate or improve these functions?

Regarding haptic feedback, Brewster et al.’s findings and respondents’ survey feedback indicate that appropriately used vibrations and other tactile feedback would be of tremendous benefit to users. The design considerations brought forth by Paolini, Costabile, and Reece reinforce the survey results that simpler, more intuitive GUIs are absolutely necessary to usability and user satisfaction.

Further Development of HTDs

Since the release of the iPad, companies have been racing to develop and produce HTDs called Internet tablets. An Internet tablet is a mobile touchscreen device that is built specifically for Internet and media applications, usually 9”x7” in size. They began to hit the market in 2010 with Toshiba’s Journ.e Touch (Slater), and are quickly becoming more popular. Hewlett-Packard (HP), Archos, Dell, and BlackBerry are a few of the other companies developing new Internet tablets.

According to Sadun (2011), what matters most about Internet tablets is not which one is faster, smaller, larger, or any other specification: “It's about user experience. It's about the way we use the device and how the device fits itself to the way we want to use it.” Some users on Maemo’s forums have expressed frustration with the screen protector, saying that its thickness and tendency to become grimy from use caused the touchscreen to respond erratically, slowly, or incorrectly. In a review of the BlackBerry Torch 9800, Topolsky (2010) lauds that in the new BlackBerry 6 operating system the “‘menus within menus’ experience of the previous operating system” had been greatly reduced. Additionally, BlackBerry developer RIM had “cleaned up and smoothed out a lot of the iconography and text in the UI, making the whole OS feel much more cohesive and consistent,” and “everything on the homescreen seems designed to help you get to your most used functions quickly.” However, the navigation functions have the potential to confuse users:

You have the choice of using the touchscreen, trackpad, or search for finding items, and in addition to the standard menu key to bring up contextual menus, long-pressing on items all over the OS reveals a separate context menu with many (though not all) of the menu key items. (Topolsky 2010)

While neither of these options for navigation are inherently frustrating for users, the combination and design of the interaction between these methods has the potential to fluster and confuse users.

A 2010 Gizmodo review expressed disgust with the Torch 9800, stating that “the screen is the dealbreaker” (Buchanan 2010). Buchanan stated that the low-resolution display felt like “having a wet fabric softener sheet shoved in between [his] eyeballs and the screen.” And, in anotherEngadget review, Stern outlined perks and frustrations for the Archos 32 Internet tablet (2010). One of the perks was the responsiveness of the touchscreen; unusually the screen is resistive, but reacts as lightly as a capacitive screen. Unfortunately, the screen was “overly glossy,” making it hard to see the screen in bright light, and the screen quality was not as sophisticated as expected. Clearly, the touchscreen interface is one of, if not the, most important aspect in user satisfaction when interacting with HTDs.

Conclusion and Future Work

Handheld, mobile devices are normal parts of our everyday lives. Touch technology, and the integration of touchscreens in handheld mobile devices, is also becoming more commonplace: touchscreens are finding their ways into the videogame industry and into restaurants as interactive tables and menus (Jacobs 2010). Furthermore, touchscreens could easily find their way into hospitals, audio production, or military applications. The diverse user base of handheld mobile devices presents a great potential for user concerns; if users are frustrated with a device, they either cannot or will not use that device to its full potential. Regarding communication and touch technology, if a communication feature on a handheld mobile device with a touch interface is deemed unnecessary, frustrating, or useless, that feature will be used less or unused entirely, thus inhibiting communication that would otherwise be possible.

Future research possibilities exist for examining Internet tablets and their functionality and usability, what functions available on Internet tablets mean for the technical communication field, and what device responsiveness means for usability. Additionally, one must consider how increasingly pervasive touchscreen technology could be effectively incorporated into more daily settings such as restaurants or home entertainment systems.