1. Project Report An investigation on data entry effectiveness & efficiency

2. Agenda  Introduction  Experiment Design  Experiment Platform  Data Analysis  Conclusion

3. Introduction  Developing fast and efficient means for text entry is one of the most pressing research topics in today!  Although the QWERTY layout is entrenched for physical keyboards, soft keyboards are easy to implement and customize.

4. Objective  To develop a statistically reliable analysis of possible factors that may have influence on the input efficiency and error rate of the soft keyboard and give design guideline on this issue.

5. Response variables  Average typing speed  Error rate

6. Cause–and-effect Diagram

7. Control variables  Keyboard layout  Key size  Key shape  Mouse C/R ratio

8. Keyboard layout

9. Other Control Factors Key size Large : the size of keys on standard physical keyboard Small : that of general electronic dictionaries Mouse C/R ratio High : the highest in the tested computer. Low : adjusted one which is the lower bound that one can bear Key shape  There are three kinds of key shape generally, but we choose two of them for simplicity: circle and square, the rest is hexagon

10. Learning Curve for Novice

11. Experiment Design(1/3)  Mixed Level Full Factorial Design  Repleicated on two testees  Each testee enters the same paragraph of text with different combinations of control factors

12. Experiment Design(2/3)

13. Experiment Design(3/3)  Block On Noise Variables  Data within each block is homogenous (exclude the potential influence of different users)  Enough DOF to Estimate Interactions  Eliminate Learning Effect  Two replicates with different (randomly generated) execution sequence

14. Platform(1/4)  Large-Small  High-Low  FITALY-OPTI II- METROPOLIS-QWERTY  Square-Circle.  There are 16 different types of soft keyboard in all.

15. Platform(2/4) FITALYOPTI II METROPOLISQWERTY

16. Platform(3/4)

17. Platform(4/4)  Saved in CSV files  Key name, x- coordinate, y- coordinate, the time when it is entered  Errors: number of “Backspace”

18. Discussion on Error Rate  Errors may not be noticed immediately.  Sequence of the words or letters may be changed, due to other reasons unrelated to the keyboard. Click “Backspace” when ever testee notices error and count the number of “Backspace” clicked as error

19. Analysis  Tools  DOE++  Minitab  Two Kinds of Responses  Time  Error rate  Principle  Treat different responses separately  Find an integrative optimal solution

20. Response Time Data Analysis

21. Step 1: ANOVA The main effect is significant

22. Step 2: Regression  Ignore the 3 or higher order effects  Keep the significant items

23. Step 3:Probability Plot

24. Step 4: Eliminate Insignificant factors  Keep A, B1, B2, B3

25. Step 5: Residual Checking

26. Step 6: Interaction Matrix

27. Conclusion  Time will be shorter when  factor size= 2(larger size)  factor layout=1(qwerty), and then 4(FITALY), 2(metro), 3(OPTI)  The factor shape and C/R ratio will not influence the result if the response is time

28. Error Rate Data Analysis

29. Step 1: ANOVA The main effect is significant

30. Step 2: Regression  Ignore the 3 or higher order effects  Keep the significant items

31. Step 3: Probability Plot

32. Step 4: Eliminate Insignificant Factors  Keep B 1, AB 1, AB 2, C

33. Step 5: Residual Checking

34. Step 6: Interaction Matrix

35. Conclusion  It is more reasonable to choose factor size= 2(larger size)  Hence factor layout = 4(FITALY) will be chosen when the size=2  The factor C/R ratio=1(low) will be better  Factor shape has no effects

36. Final Recommendation  Larger size  FITALY layout  Low C/R ratio  Both shapes

37. Potential Weakness  Limited Sample Size  Both Young Female University Students  Familiar with QWERTY  Without Upper Case  Limited to English Text

38. Q&A