article

To TUI or not to TUI: Evaluating performance and preference in tangible vs. graphical user interfaces

Authors:

Oren Zuckerman,

Ayelet Gal-OzAuthors Info & Claims

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Volume 71, Issue 7-8

Pages 803 - 820

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.04.003

Published: 01 July 2013 Publication History

Abstract

Tangible user interfaces (TUIs) are often compared to graphical user interfaces (GUIs). However, the existing literature is unable to demonstrate clear advantages for either interface, as empirical studies yielded different findings, sometimes even contradicting ones. The current study set out to conduct an in-depth analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of both interfaces, based on a comparison between similar TUI and GUI versions of a modeling and simulation system called ''FlowBlocks''. Results showed most users preferred the TUI version over the GUI version. This is a surprising finding, considering both versions were equivalent in regard to most performance parameters, and the TUI version was even perceived as inferior to the GUI version in regard to usability. Interviews with users revealed this preference stemmed from high levels of stimulation and enjoyment, derived from three TUI properties: physical interaction, rich feedback, and high levels of realism. Potential underlying mechanisms for these findings and practical implications are discussed.

References

[1]

Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a system thinking inventory. System Dynamics Review. v16. 249-286.

[2]

Making children gesture brings out implicit knowledge and leads to learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. v136. 539-550.

[3]

SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, I.L. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry, Taylor & Francis, London.

[4]

Buechley, L., Eisenberg, M., 2007. Boda blocks: a collaborative tool for tangible three-dimensional cellular automata. In: Proceedings of CSCL'07, pp. 102-104.

[5]

Children's "like-dislike" ratings of familiarized and non-familiarized visual stimuli. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. v6. 651-657.

[6]

GUI vs. TUI: engagement for children with no prior computing experience. Electronic Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology. v3. 31-39.

[7]

Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

[8]

Where the Action is: the Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[9]

Fitzmaurice, G.W., Buxton, W., 1997. An empirical evaluation of graspable user interfaces: towards specialized, space multiplexed input. In: Proceedings of CHI'97, pp. 43-50.

[10]

Fitzmaurice, G.W., Ishii, H., Buxton, W., 1995. Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces. In: Proceedings of CHI'95, pp. 442-449.

[11]

Gesturing gives children new ideas about math. Psychological Science. v20. 267-272.

[12]

Hecht, D. Reiner, M., Halevy, G., 2005. Multi-modal stimulation, response time and presence. In: Proceedings of PRESENCE'05, pp. 269-274.

[13]

Enhancement of response times to bi- and tri-modal sensory stimuli during active movements. Experimental Brain Research. v185. 655-665.

[14]

Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences. v9. 247-298.

[15]

Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Pfeffer, M.G., Malhotra, B.A., 2003, April. Fish swim and rocks sit: understanding structures, behaviors, and functions in a complex system. Paper Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.

[16]

Horn, M.S., 2008. Tangible computer programming for informal science learning. In: Proceedings of IDC'08, pp. 21-24.

[17]

Tangible interaction and learning: the case for a hybrid approach. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. v16. 379-389.

[18]

Horn, M.S., Solovey, E.T., Crouser, R.J., Jacob, R.J.K., 2009. Comparing the use of tangible and graphical programming languages for informal science education. In: Proceedings of CHI'09, pp. 975-984.

[19]

Hornecker, E., Buur, J., 2006. Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI'06, pp. 437-446.

[20]

Ishii, H., Ullmer, B., 1997. Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In: Proceedings of CHI'97, pp. 234-241.

[21]

Jacob, R.J.K., Ishii, H., Pangaro, G., Patten, J., 2002. A tangible interface for organizing information using a grid. In: Proceedings of CHI'02, pp. 339-346.

[22]

Klemmer, S.R., Hartmann, B., Takayama, L., 2006. How bodies matter: five themes for interaction design. In: Proceedings of DIS'06, pp. 140-149.

[23]

What drives people to continue to play online games? An extension of technology model and theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. v26. 601-620.

[24]

'To play or not to play': a cross-temporal investigation using hedonic and instrumental perspectives to explain user intentions to explore a technology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. v68. 572-588.

[25]

Manches, A., O'Malley, C., Benford, S., 2009. Physical manipulation: evaluating the potential for tangible designs. In: Proceedings of TEI'09, pp. 77-84.

[26]

Marshall, P., 2007. Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? In: Proceedings of TEI'07, pp. 163-170.

[27]

Marshall, P., Cheng, P.C.-H., Luckin, R., 2010. Tangibles in the balance: a discovery learning task with physical or graphical materials. In: Proceedings of TEI'10, pp. 153-160.

[28]

Marshall, P., Fleck, R., Harris, A., Rick, J., Hornecker, E., Rogers, Y., Yuill, N., Dalton, N.S., 2009. Fighting for control: children's embodied interactions when using physical and digital representations. In: Proceedings of CHI'09, pp. 2149-2152.

[29]

Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. v60. 48-58.

[30]

Newton-Dunn, H., Nakano, H., Gibson J., 2003. Block Jam: a tangible interface for interactive music. In: Proceedings of NIME'03, pp. 170-177.

[31]

Introduction to this special section on beauty, goodness, and usability. Human-Computer Interaction. v19. 311-318.

[32]

The influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on user engagement: the case of online shopping experiences. Interacting with Computers. v22. 344-352.

[33]

Patten, J., Ishii, H., 2000. A comparison of spatial organization strategies in graphical and tangible user interfaces. In: Proceedings of DARE'00, pp. 41-50.

Digital Library

[34]

Raffle, H.S., Parkes, A.J., Ishii, H., 2004. Topobo: a constructive assembly system with kinetic memory. In: Proceedings of CHI'04, pp. 647-654.

[35]

Resnick, M., Martin, F., Berg, R., Borovoy, R., Colella, V., Kramer, K., Silverman, B., 1998. Digital manipulatives: new toys to think with. In: Proceedings of CHI'98, pp. 281-287.

[36]

Conceptual framework for mixed reality environments: designing novel learning activities for young children. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. v11. 677-686.

[37]

Distribution of knowledge, group network structure, and group performance. Management Science. v46. 612-625.

[38]

The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. DoubleDay, New York.

[39]

Tangible user interfaces: past, present, and future directions. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction. v3. 1-137.

[40]

A specification paradigm for the design and implementation of tangible user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. v16. 1-39.

[41]

Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw-Hill, Boston.

[42]

Giving memory a hand: Instructing children to gesture enhances their event recall. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. v29. 217-233.

[43]

Suzuki, H., Kato, H., 1995. Interaction-level support for collaborative learning: AlgoBlock-an open programming language. In: Proceedings of CSCL'95, pp. 349-355.

[44]

Terrenghi, L., Kirk, D., Sellen, A., Izadi, S., 2007. Affordances for manipulation of physical versus digital media on interactive surfaces. In: Proceedings of CHI'07, pp. 1157-1166.

[45]

Tuddenham, P., Kirk, D., Izadi, S., 2010. Graspables revisited: multi-touch vs. tangible input for tabletop displays in acquisition and manipulation tasks. In: Proceedings of CHI'10, pp. 2223-2232.

[46]

Ullmer, B., Ishii, H., 1999. Mediablocks: tangible interfaces for online media. In: Proceedings of CHI'99, pp. 31-32.

[47]

Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces. IBM Systems Journal. v39. 915-931.

[48]

Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, soial influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly. v24. 115-139.

[49]

The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior. v9. 411-426.

[50]

Wyeth, P., Purchase, H.C., 2002. Tangible programming elements for young children. In: Proceedings of CHI'02, pp. 774-775.

[51]

Xie, L., Antle, A.N., Motamedi, N., 2008. Are tangibles more fun? Comparing children's enjoyment and engagement using physical, graphical and tangible user interfaces. In: Proceedings of TEI'08, pp. 191-198.

[52]

Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. v9. 1-27.

[53]

Zuckerman O., Arida S., Resnick M. 2005. Extending tangible interfaces for education: digital Montessori-inspired manipulatives. In: Proceedings CHI'05, pp. 859-868.

[54]

Zuckerman, O., Grotzer, T., Leahy, K., 2006. Flow blocks as a conceptual bridge between understanding the structure and behavior of a complex causal system. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, pp. 880-886.

[55]

Zuckerman, O., Resnick, M., 2003. System blocks: a physical interface for system dynamics simulation. In: Proceedings of CHI'03, pp. 810-811.

[56]

Zuckerman, O., Resnick, M., 2004. Hands-on modeling and simulation of systems. In: Proceedings of IDC'04, pp. 157-158.

[57]

Zuckerman, O., Resnick, M., 2005. Children's misconceptions as barriers to learning stock- and flow- modeling. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, 2005.

Cited By

Morag Yaar NSadka OShatil IAharonson MEfrima BBarda THayat MZuckerman OErel H(2024)Kitchef: A TUI for Parent-Child Cooking TogetherExtended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650970(1-7)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3650970
Papatheodorou TWolpert J(2023)Lights! Dance! Freeze!Proceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques10.1145/35976206:2(1-8)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597620
Jansen AColombo S(2023)Mix & Match Machine Learning: An Ideation Toolkit to Design Machine Learning-Enabled SolutionsProceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction10.1145/3569009.3572739(1-18)Online publication date: 26-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3569009.3572739
Show More Cited By

To TUI or not to TUI: Evaluating performance and preference in tangible vs. graphical user interfaces
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

TUI or GUI--It's a Matter of Somatics

The author considers the advantages and possibilities for developing and implementing touch-based interfaces.
Graspables revisited: multi-touch vs. tangible input for tabletop displays in acquisition and manipulation tasks
CHI '10: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

We present an experimental comparison of multi-touch and tangible user interfaces for basic interface actions. Twelve participants completed manipulation and acquisition tasks on an interactive surface in each of three conditions: tangible user ...
Portico: tangible interaction on and around a tablet
UIST '11: Proceedings of the 24th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology

We present Portico, a portable system for enabling tangible interaction on and around tablet computers. Two cameras on small foldable arms are positioned above the display to recognize a variety of physical objects placed on or around the tablet. These ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

Copyright © Elsevier Ltd © 2013.

Publisher

Academic Press, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2013

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

53
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 15 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Morag Yaar NSadka OShatil IAharonson MEfrima BBarda THayat MZuckerman OErel H(2024)Kitchef: A TUI for Parent-Child Cooking TogetherExtended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650970(1-7)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3650970
Papatheodorou TWolpert J(2023)Lights! Dance! Freeze!Proceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques10.1145/35976206:2(1-8)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597620
Jansen AColombo S(2023)Mix & Match Machine Learning: An Ideation Toolkit to Design Machine Learning-Enabled SolutionsProceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction10.1145/3569009.3572739(1-18)Online publication date: 26-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3569009.3572739
Madariaga LAllendes CNussbaum MBarrios GAcevedo N(2023)Offline and online user experience of gamified robotics for introducing computational thinkingComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104664193:COnline publication date: 1-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104664
Lam MMuhammad Nizam SArshad HSuwadi N(2023)Tangible interaction technique with authoring capability for kitchen designMultimedia Tools and Applications10.1007/s11042-023-14376-382:19(30125-30150)Online publication date: 20-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11042-023-14376-3
Zhang XHan DDong YRen X(2023)DataVisage: A Card-Based Design Workshop to Support Design Ideation on Data PhysicalizationEntertainment Computing – ICEC 202310.1007/978-981-99-8248-6_45(471-483)Online publication date: 15-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-981-99-8248-6_45
Beşevli CGöksun TÖzcan O(2022)An Inquiry into the TUI Design Space for Parent-Child Math Engagement at HomeNordic Human-Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3546155.3546672(1-12)Online publication date: 8-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3546155.3546672
Bilstrup KKaspersen MLarsen MBouvin NPetersen M(2022)The Best of Both Worlds: Designing a Tiered Hybrid Interface for Teaching Machine Learning in K-9 EducationNordic Human-Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3546155.3546156(1-12)Online publication date: 8-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3546155.3546156
Li YGao ZEgger SMayer SHussmann H(2022)Tangible Interfaces Support Young Children’s Goal InterdependenceProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202210.1145/3543758.3543782(147-157)Online publication date: 4-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543758.3543782
Maximilaan Smeitink HFrens J(2022)Domino: Twin interfaces to unveil the influence of personality traits on usabilityProceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction10.1145/3490149.3502254(1-14)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3490149.3502254
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents