Multi-touch accceptance: perceived disorientation and consequences on task engagement

The research project takes place within the technology acceptability framework which tries to understand the use made of new technologies, and concentrates more specifically on the factors that influence multi-touch devices’ (MTD) acceptance and intention to use. Why be interested in MTD? Nowadays, this technology is used in all kinds of human activities, e.g. leisure, study or work activities (Rogowski and Saeed, 2012). However, the handling or the data entry by means of gestures on multi-touch-sensitive screen imposes a number of constraints and consequences which remain mostly unknown (Park and Han, 2013). Currently, few researches in ergonomic psychology wonder about the implications of these new human-computer interactions on task fulfillment.This research project aims to investigate the cognitive, sensori-motor and motivational processes taking place during the use of those devices. The project will analyze the influences of the use of gestures and the type of gesture used: simple or complex gestures (Lao, Heng, Zhang, Ling, and Wang, 2009), as well as the personal self-efficacy feeling in the use of MTD on task engagement, attention mechanisms and perceived disorientation (Chen, Linen, Yen, and Linn, 2011) when confronted to the use of MTD. For that purpose, the various above-mentioned concepts will be measured within a usability laboratory (U-Lab) with self-reported methods (questionnaires) and objective indicators (physiological indicators, eye tracking). Globally, the whole research aims to understand the processes at stakes, as well as advantages and inconveniences of this new technology, to favor a better compatibility and adequacy between gestures, executed tasks and MTD. The conclusions will allow some recommendations for the use of the DMT in specific contexts (e.g. learning context).

HER-2/neu evaluation by immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization in breast cancer: implications for daily laboratory practice.

BACKGROUND: HER-2/neu status was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) methods in more than 300 paraffin-embedded primary breast cancer samples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: HER-2/neu status was determined by FISH using the PathVysion kit (Vysis) and by IHC using either a monoclonal antibody CB11 or a cocktail of antibodies: the monoclonal TAB250 and the polyclonal pAb1. RESULTS: Of the 324 cases evaluable by IHC, 65 out of 318 (20%) and 24 out of 324 (7%) were scored as positive when using the antibody cocktail and the CB11, respectively. HER-2/neu gene amplification occured in 64 out of 324 cases (20%). Concordance of FISH and IHC was found in 285 out of 318 cases (90%) and 278 out of 324 cases (86%) using the cocktail and the CB11, respectively. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that the use of a sensitive IHC method followed by confirmation of positive results by FISH considerably decreased the FISH costs and may become standard practice for HER-2/neu evaluation.