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.

Head repositioning accuracy in patients with neck pain and asymptomatic subjects: concurrent validity, influence of motion speed, motion direction and target distance

Background: Cervicocephalic kinesthetic deficiencies have been demonstrated in patients with chronic neck pain (NP). On the other hand, authors emphasized the use of different motion speeds for assessing functional impairment of the cervical spine. Purpose: The objectives of this study were (1) to investigate the head repositioning accuracy in NP patients and control subjects and (2) to assess the influence of target distance, motion speed, motion direction and pain. Materials and methods: Seventy-one subjects (36 healthy subjects and 35 NP patients; age 30–55 years) performed the head repositioning test (HRT) at two different speeds for horizontal and vertical movements and at two different distances. For each condition, six consecutive trials were sampled. Results: The study showed the validity and reproducibility of the HRT, confirming a dysfunctional threshold of 4.5°. Normative values of head repositioning error up to 3.6° and 7.1° were identified for healthy and NP subjects, respectively. A distance of 180 cm from the target and a natural motion speed increased HRT accuracy. Repositioning after extension movement showed a significantly larger error in both groups. Intensity, duration of pain as well as pain level did not significantly alter head repositioning error. Conclusions: The assessment of proprioceptive performance in healthy and NP subjects allowed the validation of the HRT. The HRT is a simple, not expensive and fast test, easily implementable in daily practice to assess and monitor treatment and evolution of proprioceptive cervical deficits.