Assessing the Target’ Size and Drag Distance in Mobile Applications for Users with Autism
Users with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) show great interest in, and operate with facility, technological devices like smartphones and tablets. As a result, the number of applications specially developed for these kinds of users keeps growing. Nevertheless, the creation of an application that adapts to user abilities is not a straightforward process. This article focuses on identifying the optimal target size and drag distance that developers and designers can use when creating applications for users with ASD to allow for easier interaction of users with screen elements. In the experiment performed, different target sizes and drag distances were compared. Based on the results, we suggest that 57 pixels is the minimum target size to support the interaction of level 1 and 2 for users diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorders. These results can be used as guidelines for interaction designers of mobile applications for autism. Nevertheless, the creation of an application that adapts to user abilities is not a straightforward process, because users with these conditions have significant sensory-motor problems.
KeywordsAutism Usability Dragging Design guidelines
We appreciate the support of Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) and Universidad Autónoma de Baja California for resources provided to develop this research.
- 1.American Psychiatric Association.: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edn. (2014)Google Scholar
- 4.Josman, N., Ben-Chaim, H.M., Friedrich, S., (Tamar) Weiss, P.L.: Effectiveness of virtual reality for teaching street-crossing skills to children and adolescents with autism. Int. J. Disabil. Hum. Dev. Spec. Issue Hum. Dev. through Interact. Envrion. 7(1), 49–56 (2013)Google Scholar
- 5.Weiss, P.L., et al.: Usability of technology supported social competence training for children on the Autism Spectrum. In: 2011 International Conference Virtual Rehabilitation, ICVR 2011, no. Imi (2011)Google Scholar
- 6.Card, S., Moran, T., Newell, A.: The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction (1983)Google Scholar
- 7.Rice, A.D., Lartigue, J.W.: Touch-level model (TLM): evolving KLM-GOMS for touchscreen and mobile devices categories and subject descriptors. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 1–6 (2014)Google Scholar
- 10.El Batran, K., Dunlop, M.D.: Enhancing KLM (keystroke-level model) to fit touch screen mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices & Services- MobileHCI 2014, pp. 283–286 (2014)Google Scholar
- 11.Spindler, M., Schuessler, M., Martsch, M., Dachselt, R.: Pinch-drag-flick vs. spatial input: rethinking zoom & pan on mobile displays. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1113–1122 (2014)Google Scholar
- 12.Motti, L., Vigouroux, G.N., Gorce, P.: Drag-and-drop for older adults using touchscreen devices: effects of screen sizes and interaction techniques on accuracy. In: 26th French-Speaking Conference on Human-Machine Interact, HMI 2014, pp. 139–146 (2014)Google Scholar
- 13.Leitão, R., Silva, P.: Target and spacing sizes for smartphone user interfaces for older adults: design patterns based on an evaluation with users. In: Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, vol. 202915, pp. 19–21 (2012)Google Scholar