Multi-touch and keyboard/mouse devices comparison in an information search task: influence on cognitive load and task engagement

Nowadays multi-touch devices (MTD) can be found in all kind of contexts. In the learning context, MTD availability leads many teachers to use them in their class room, to support the use of the devices by students, or to assume that it will enhance the learning processes. Despite the raising interest for MTD, few researches studying the impact in term of performance or the suitability of the technology for the learning context exist. However, even if the use of touch-sensitive screens rather than a mouse and keyboard seems to be the easiest and fastest way to realize common learning tasks (as for instance web surfing behaviour), we notice that the use of MTD may lead to a less favourable outcome. The complexity to generate an accurate fingers gesture and the split attention it requires (multi-tasking effect) make the use of gestures to interact with a touch-sensitive screen more difficult compared to the traditional laptop use. More precisely, it is hypothesized that efficacy and efficiency decreases, as well as the available cognitive resources making the users’ task engagement more difficult. Furthermore, the presented study takes into account the moderator effect of previous experiences with MTD. Two key factors of technology adoption theories were included in the study: familiarity and self-efficacy with the technology.Sixty university students, invited to a usability lab, are asked to perform information search tasks on an online encyclopaedia. The different tasks were created in order to execute the most commonly used mouse actions (e.g. right click, left click, scrolling, zooming, key words encoding…). Two different conditions were created: (1) MTD use and (2) laptop use (with keyboard and mouse). The cognitive load, self-efficacy, familiarity and task engagement scales were adapted to the MTD context. Furthermore, the eye-tracking measurement would offer additional information about user behaviours and their cognitive load.Our study aims to clarify some important aspects towards the usage of MTD and the added value compared to a laptop in a student learning context. More precisely, the outcomes will enhance the suitability of MTD with the processes at stakes, the role of previous knowledge in the adoption process, as well as some interesting insights into the user experience with such devices.

We want to touch IT. Are hybrid laptops just new fancy gadgets or a new revolution?

While the number of traditional laptops and computers sold has dipped slightly year over year, manufacturers have developed new hybrid laptops with touch screens to build on the tactile trend. This market is moving quickly to make touch the rule rather than the exception and the sales of these devices have tripled since the launch of Windows 8 in 2012, to reach more than sixty million units sold in 2015. Unlike tablets, that benefit from easy-to-use applications specially designed for tactile interactions, hybrid laptops are intended to be used with regular user-interfaces. Hence, one could ask whether tactile interactions are suited for every task and activity performed with such interfaces. Since hybrid laptops are increasingly used in educational situations, this study focuses on information search tasks which are commonly performed for learning purposes. It is hypothesized that tasks that require complex and/or less common gestures will increase user's cognitive load and impair task performance in terms of efficacy and efficiency. A study was carried out in a usability laboratory with 30 participants for whom prior experience with tactile devices has been controlled. They were asked to perform information search tasks on an online encyclopaedia by using only the touch screen of and hybrid laptop. Tasks were selected with respect to their level of cognitive demand (amount of information that had to be maintained in working memory) and the complexity of gestures needed (left and/or right clicks, zoom, text selection and/or input.), and grouped into 4 sets accordingly. Task performance was measured by the number of tasks succeeded (efficacy) and time spent on each task (efficiency). Perceived cognitive load was assessed thanks to a questionnaire given after each set of tasks. An eye tracking device was used to monitor users' attention allocation and to provide objective cognitive load measures based on pupil dilation and the Index of Cognitive Activity. Each experimental run took approximately one hour. The results of this within-subjects design indicate that tasks involving complex gestures led to a lower efficacy, especially when the tasks were cognitively demanding. Regarding efficacy, there is no significant differences between sets of tasks excepted for tasks with low cognitive demand and complex gestures that required more time to be achieved. Surprisingly, users that declared the biggest experience with tactile devices spent more time than less frequent users. Cognitive load measures indicate that participants reported having devoted more mental effort in the interaction when they had to use complex gestures.