=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2183/paper2
|storemode=property
|title=Put a Ring on It: Text Entry Performance on a Grip Ring Attached Smartphone
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2183/paper2.pdf
|volume=Vol-2183
|authors=Monwen Shen,Gulnar Rakhmetulla,Ahmed Sabbir Arif
}}
==Put a Ring on It: Text Entry Performance on a Grip Ring Attached Smartphone==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2183/paper2.pdf
Barcelona, Spain | September 3, 2018 MobileHCI 2018 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects of Text Entry
Put a Ring on It: Text Entry Performance
on a Grip Ring Attached Smartphone
Monwen Shen Abstract
Gulnar Rakhmetulla This paper presents results of a study investing effects
Ahmed Sabbir Arif of grip rings on text entry. Results revealed that grip
Human-Computer Interaction Group rings do not affect text entry performance in terms of
University of California, Merced speed, accuracy, or keystrokes per character. It then
Merced, CA, USA reflects on future research directions based on the
mshen6@ucmerced.edu results and observations from the study. The purpose
grakhmetulla@ucmerced.edu of this work is to stress the necessity of classifying and
asarif@ucmerced.edu evaluating low-cost mobile phone accessories.
Author Keywords
Bunker ring; grip ring; smartphone; accessories;
gadgets; text entry; input; interaction.
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6): Input
devices and strategies (e.g., mouse, touchscreen);
H.1.2. Models and Principles: User/Machine Systems.
Introduction
Low-cost mobile phone accessories, such as portable
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed power banks, panoramic pods, selfie sticks, different
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation types of lenses for photography, screen magnifiers, VR
on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored.
For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). headsets, cases, grip rings, PopSockets, etc., are
Copyright held by the owner/author(s). becoming increasingly popular among mobile users [6],
MobileHCI, 2018 Barcelona, Spain.
likely due to their affordability. With mobile phones,
these accessories are also becoming ubiquitous. Hence,
it is essential that these devices are designed with due
6
Barcelona, Spain | September 3, 2018 MobileHCI 2018 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects of Text Entry
consideration of human factors. Since not much work to four-loop attachment that enables thumb-free grip of
has focused on this, we review and evaluate the mobile phones (Figure 4). Unlike most other grips, it
effectiveness and usability of different mobile phone cannot be used as a stand.
accessories. This exploration started with commercial
selfie sticks [1] and then moved towards other low-cost
accessories. This paper presents results of a user study
that investigated impact of grip ring on mobile phone
text entry performance in a stationary position. This is
a continuation of a prior work that explored pointing
accuracy on grip ring attached mobile phones [4].
Related Work Figure 4. Two and three-loop LAZY-HANDS grip. From LAZY-
HANDS.com
Figure 1. A user interacting with a grip Commonly available mobile phone grip rings enable
ring attached mobile phone. From users to hold their devices safely. Users can slip their User Study
Amazon. finger through the ring to keep their mobile phone We conducted a user study to investigate any potential
firmly in hand (Figure 1). It also serves as a stand. impact of grip ring on text entry performance.
Users can swivel the ring up to 360 degrees to set it at
the ideal video watching angle (Figure 2). Kawabata et Apparatus
al. [4] conducted a user study to investigate pointing We used a Google Pixel XL smartphone, 154.7 × 75.7 ×
accuracy on grip ring attached mobile phones. Results 8.5 mm, 168 g, at 534 ppi density during the study. We
revealed that attaching grip ring improves pointing attached a Bunker Ring [9], 22.1 mm, at the center of
accuracy for smaller targets and attaching the ring at the phone since this position yielded better pointing
the middle yields relatively better results. accuracy in a prior study [4]. Bunker Ring is one of the
most sold grip rings on Amazon [9]. We used WebTEM
[2] to record text entry performance.
Participants
Seven participants, three female and four male,
average age 27.4 years (SD = 3.8) participated in the
study. All were right-handed and experienced mobile
Figure 2. Grip ring swiveled in different users (over six years’ experience). Only one (female,
degrees for different viewing angles. From Figure 3. PopSocket. From Minds Alive and Glik’s.
28 years) used a grip ring on her mobile device.
Lynktec and Rakuten Global Market.
Several alternatives to grip rings are available, most
popularly PopSocket [7] and LAZY-HANDS [8]. The first Design
is a collapsible grip and stand that is expanded to use We used a within-subjects design for the user study.
(Figure 3) and collapsed to lay flat. The second is a two There were two conditions: with and without grip ring. The
7
Barcelona, Spain | September 3, 2018 MobileHCI 2018 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects of Text Entry
conditions were counterbalanced. In each condition,
participants transcribed 15 short English phrases [5] using
WebTEM [2]. In summary the design was: 7 participants
× 2 conditions × 15 phrases = 210 phrases, in total.
Figure 5 shows a volunteer participating in the study.
Procedure
Upon arrival, we demonstrated the grip ring to all
participants and allowed them to try it. We then started
the study, where each participant transcribed 15 short
English phrases from a set [5] using a smartphone with
and without grip ring. WebTEM [2] displayed one random
phrase from the set at a time and asked them to Figure 6. Average entry speed for the two examined
transcribe it. Once done, participants had to press the conditions. Error bars represent ±1 standard error (SE).
“Enter” key to see the next phrase. All participants
Figure 5. A participant transcribing text Error Rate (ER)
using a grip ring attached mobile phone. transcribed text in a seated position (Figure 5). They
were instructed to hold the device in portrait position An ANOVA failed to identify a significant effect of grip
with the dominant hand and then input with the thumb of ring on ER (F1,6 = 1.08, p > .05). On average ER
the same hand. They used the default Android keyboard. without and with grip ring were 0.32% (SE = 0.09) and
However, we disabled all predictive features, including the 0.46% (SE = 0.09), respectively. See Figure 7.
prediction bar, auto-correction, capitalization, and custom
dictionary, to eliminate a potential confound. Error
correction was recommended, but was not forced [3].
WebTEM [2] logged all major text entry performance
metrics [3]. At the end of the study, participants
completed a short questionnaire about the grip ring.
Results
We used a repeated-measures ANOVA for all analysis.
Words per Minute (WPM)
An ANOVA failed to identify a significant effect of grip
ring on entry speed (F1,6 = 0.05, p > .05). On average
entry speed without and with grip ring were 25.56 WPM Figure 7. Average error rate for the two examined conditions.
(SE = 1.09) and 25.59 WPM (SE = 1.08), respectively. Error bars represent ±1 standard error (SE).
Figure 6 illustrates this.
8
Barcelona, Spain | September 3, 2018 MobileHCI 2018 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects of Text Entry
Keystrokes per Character (KSPC) mobile phone usage and users’ interest in using grip
An ANOVA failed to identify a significant effect of grip rings or similar devices. In other words, whether heavy
ring on KSPC (F1,6 = 2.68, p > .05). On average KSPC mobile users are more likely to adapt to these devices
without and with grip ring were 1.13 (SE = 0.03) and or not. Interestingly, we observed that different users
1.08 (SE = 0.03), respectively. Figure 8 illustrates this. use different fingers with grip rings. This could be due
to different hand sizes. Yet, we cannot validate this due
Qualitative Data to insufficient data.
Most participant (57%, N = 4) did not feel that grip ring
had any impact on entry speed or accuracy, while 29% Future Work
(N = 2) felt it improved their entry speed and accuracy. In the future, we will include more participants in the
The remaining 14% (N = 1) were neutral. Only 29% study. Since grip rings are likely to be more useful
(N = 2) responded that they would consider using grip while walking, we will investigate whether it influences
ring on their mobile devices, one of them was already text entry performance on the go. We will also explore
Figure 8. Average keystrokes per character using a grip ring. 57% (N = 4) responded that they if handedness and different hand sizes impact grip ring
for the two examined conditions. Error bars
would not use grip rings, while the remaining 14% (N = usage, preference, and performance. Finally, we will
signify ±1 standard error (SE).
1) were neutral. expand our investigation to various grip ring
alternatives, such as PopSockets and LAZY-HANDS.
Grip Finger
We observed that participant exclusively used index Conclusion
finger (71%, N = 5) or the ring finger (29%, N = 2) for We presented results of a study that suggested that
the grip ring. This could be due differences in hand grip rings do not affect text entry performance in terms
sizes. However, we do not have sufficient data to fully of speed, accuracy, and keystrokes per character. We
investigate this. then reflected on future research directions based on
the results and observations. The purpose of this work
Discussion was to highlight the importance of classifying and
Results revealed that there was no significant effect of evaluating low-cost mobile phone accessories.
grip ring on text entry performance. Both conditions
yielded comparable entry speed, accuracy, and Proposed Workshop Scenario
keystrokes per character. However, since target In the workshop, we wish to discuss potential effects of
selection is arguably more difficult in mobile settings, various low-cost mobile phone accessories on text entry
such as while walking and commuting, grip ring may performance. Our intent is to highlight the importance
benefit text entry on the go. of categorizing and evaluating these devices. We also
wish to discuss why certain mobile accessories are
Qualitative data showed that most participants were more popular in some countries than in the others,
reluctant on using grip rings on their devices. It may be focusing on the sociotechnical aspects of these
worthwhile to investigate if there is a link between accessories.
9
Barcelona, Spain | September 3, 2018 MobileHCI 2018 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects of Text Entry
References 9. Bunker Ring. Retrieved June 13, 2018 from
1. Ahmed Sabbir Arif, Sunjun Kim, and Geehyuk Lee. http://www.bunkerring.com
2017. Usability of different types of commercial
selfie sticks. In Proceedings of the 19th Biography
International Conference on Human-Computer This section presents short biographies of the authors.
Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services -
MobileHCI ’17, 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3098279.3098549 Monwen Shen is a MS student at the University of
California, Merced. His research interests include
2. Ahmed Sabbir Arif and Ali Mazalek. 2016. WebTEM:
embedded systems and Internet of things.
a Web application to record text entry metrics. In
Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Interactive
Surfaces and Spaces - ISS ’16, 415–420. Gulnar Rakhmetulla is a PhD student at the
https://doi.org/10.1145/2992154.2996791 University of California, Merced. Her research focuses
3. Ahmed Sabbir Arif and Wolfgang Stuerzlinger. on text entry evaluation metrics and the design and
2009. Analysis of text entry performance metrics. development of accessible text entry techniques.
In Proceedings of the IEEE Toronto International
Conference - Science and Technology for Humanity Ahmed Sabbir Arif is an Assistant Professor at the
- TIC-STH ’09, 100–105.
University of California, Merced, where he leads the
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIC-STH.2009.5444533
Human-Computer Interaction Group. A major thread of
4. Yuya Kawabata, Daisuke Komoriya, Yuki Kubo,
his research focuses on smarter solutions for text entry
Buntarou Shizuki, and Jiro Tanaka. 2016. Effects of
holding ring attached to mobile devices on pointing and editing. He also models text entry performance and
accuracy. In Human-Computer Interaction. designs text entry techniques for underrepresented
Interaction Platforms and Techniques. 309–319. languages and user groups.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39516-6_30
5. I. Scott MacKenzie and R. William Soukoreff. 2003.
Phrase sets for evaluating text entry techniques. In
CHI ’03 extended abstracts on Human factors in
computer systems - CHI ’03, 754.
https://doi.org/10.1145/765968.765971
6. Global Mobile Phone Accessories Market 2017-
2023. PR Newswire. Retrieved June 12, 2018 from
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-
releases/global-mobile-phone-accessories-market-
2017-2023-300483437.html
7. PopSockets. Retrieved June 13, 2018 from
https://www.popsockets.com
8. LAZY-HANDS. Retrieved June 13, 2018 from
https://www.lazy-hands.com
10