COMPARISON OF A CONVENTIONAL KEYBOARD TO AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE AND SHORT INTERVAL PAUSES

 
 
 
 

COMPARISON OF A CONVENTIONAL KEYBOARD TO AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE AND SHORT INTERVAL PAUSES

Show full item record


Title: COMPARISON OF A CONVENTIONAL KEYBOARD TO AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE AND SHORT INTERVAL PAUSES
Author: DABABNEH, AWNI JAMIL
Description: A number of keyboard designs have been developed which differ from the conventional keyboard design. Each of these designs has the goal to address awkward postures promoted by the conventional keyboard. Studies investigating these “alternative” keyboards designs have found that some alter working posture, and reduce discomfort. However, performance measurement has had little attention. Performance measures are the traditional domain of industrial engineering and human factors engineering. Performance measures translate into improved productivity and profits; and can be used to convince those who must authorize what are seen as high expenditures on ergonomically improved keyboards, by justifying the cost of using such ergonomically designed keyboards to relate improved posture to improved performance. This study, part of a larger one (Swanson et al, 1997), compared three keyboards of different designs and two position settings to a conventional (control) keyboard. Performance data were collected over a period of three days for each subject. For this study 25 subjects were randomly selected, (5 subjects from each of 5 keyboard conditions). These subjects were chosen using pre-defined population characteristics so that variability between and among subjects would be minimized. The work performance indicators were monitored on a continuous basis during the sessions. All data for the control and comparison groups was gathered and separated for error rate and keystroke rate and aggregated over 5 minute periods. This study utilized Cakir’s five types of errors (e.g., omission and random errors, mistaken neighboring, shift task mistake, multiple characters hit, and fat finger error, (Cakir, 1995). The study also explored the total number of short interval pauses and their time consumed as another measure of performance. Data was analyzed through a simple Mixed Design Analysis of Variance, with t-test comparisons to examine significant main effects and interactions. The results indicated that although the rate of most types of errors did not differ by keyboard condition, several of the alternative keyboards did have higher numbers of certain errors associated with them. The Kinesis keyboard had greater numbers of omissions and random errors as well as mistaken neighboring key, associated with it. The Ergologic keyboard, in the upright position, had greater numbers of multiple keys hit. Additionally, the Comfort keyboard had longer spontaneous pauses during its use. These all indicated that a longer period may be needed as a learning period for each alternative keyboard.
Permanent Link: http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1061229550
http://hdl.handle.net/2374.OX/12019
Date: 2003

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record