Menu Design in Cell Phones: Use of 3D Menus

  • Kyungdoh Kim
  • Robert W. Proctor
  • Gavriel Salvendy
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5612)


The number of mobile phone users has been steadily increasing due to the development of microtechnology and human needs for ubiquitous communication. Menu design features play a significant role in cell phone design from the perspective of customer satisfaction. Moreover, small screens of the type used on mobile phones are limited in the amount of available space. Therefore, it is important to obtain good menu design. Review of previous menu design studies for human-computer interaction suggests that design guidelines for mobile phones need to be reappraised, especially 3D display features. We propose a conceptual model for cell phone menu design with 3D displays. The three main factors included in the model are: the number of items, task complexity, and task type.


cell phones menu design 3D menu task complexity task type 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ling, C., Hwang, W., Salvendy, G.: A survey of what customers want in a cell phone design. Behaviour & Information Technology 26, 149–163 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jacko, J.A., Salvendy, G., Koubek, R.J.: Modelling of menu design in computerized work. Interacting with Computers 7, 304–330 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Seppala, P., Salvendy, G.: Impact of depth of menu hierarchy on performance effectiveness in a supervisory task: computerized flexible manufacturing system. Human Factors 27, 713–722 (1985)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hornbaek, K., Hertzum, M.: Untangling the usability of fisheye menus. ACM Trans. on Computer-Human Interaction, Article 6, 1–32 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dachselt, R., Ebert, J.: Collapsible cylindrical trees: a fast hierarchical navigation technique. In: Information Visualization, INFOVIS 2001, pp. 79–86 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Findlater, L., McGrenere, J.: A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus. In: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 89–96 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geven, A., Sefelin, R., Tscheligi, M.: Depth and breadth away from the desktop: the optimal information hierarchy for mobile use. In: Proceedings of the 8th conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, pp. 157–164 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gutwin, C., Fedak, C.: Interacting with big interfaces on small screens: a comparison of fisheye, zoom, and panning techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Graphics Interface, pp. 145–152 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dawkins, A.L.: Personalized Hierarchical Menu Organization for Mobile Device Users. Vol. Master. North Carolina (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beardow, P.: Enabling Wireless Interactive 3D. article retrieved from the Superscape Plc (June 2004), www.superscape.comin
  11. 11.
    Chae, M., Kim, J.: Do size and structure matter to mobile users? An empirical study of the effects of screen size, information structure, and task complexity on user activities with standard web phones. Behaviour and Information Technology 23, 165–181 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jacko, J.A., Salvendy, G.: Hierarchical menu design: Breadth, depth, and task complexity. Perceptual and Motor Skills 82, 1187–1201 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bernard, M., Hamblin, C.: Cascading versus Indexed Menu Design. Usability News 5 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gajos, K.Z., Czerwinski, M., Tan, D.S., Weld, D.S.: Exploring the design space for adaptive graphical user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 201–208 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mitchell, J., Shneiderman, B.: Dynamic versus static menus: an exploratory comparison. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin 20, 33–37 (1989)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang, S.C.: Empirical Evaluation of a Popular Cellular Phone’s Menu System: Theory Meets Practice. Journal of Usability Studies, 136–150 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hakala, T., Lehikoinen, J., Aaltonen, A.: Spatial interactive visualization on small screen. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices & Services, pp. 137–144 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Combs, T.T.A., Bederson, B.B.: Does Zooming Improve Image Browsing? In: Proceedings of the fourth ACM Conference on Digital Libraries, pp. 130–137 (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ware, C.: Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ware, C., Franck, G.: Evaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing information nets in three dimensions. ACM Transactions on Graphics 15, 121–140 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Robertson, C.M., Larson, K., Robbins, D.C., Thiel, D., van Dantzich, M.: Data mountain: using spatial memory for document management. In: Proceedings of the 11th annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 153–162 (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rekimoto, J.: Tilting operations for small screen interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 9th annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 167–168 (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robertson, C.S.K., Mackinlay, J.D.: Information visualization using 3D interactive animation. Communications of the ACM 36, 57–71 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Molina, J.P., Gonzalez, P., Lozano, M.D., Montero, F., Lopez-Jaquero, V.: Bridging the Gap: Developing 2D and 3D User Interfaces with the IDEAS Methodology. In: Jorge, J.A., Jardim Nunes, N., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) DSV-IS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2844, pp. 303–315. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Suzuki, M.T., Yaginuma, Y., Sugimoto, Y.Y.: A 3D model retrieval system for cellular phones. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 4, pp. 3846–3851 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: 3D or not 3D?: evaluating the effect of the third dimension in a document management system. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 434–441 (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Dam, A.: Post-WIMP user interfaces. Communications of the ACM 40, 63–67 (1997)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jones, W.P., Dumais, S.T.: The spatial metaphor for user interfaces: experimental tests of reference by location versus name. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 4, 42–63 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: An Evaluation of Cone Trees. People and Computers XIV-Usability Or Else! 425–434 (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Salvendy, G., Knight, J.: Psychomotor work capabilities. In: Salvendy, G. (ed.) Handbook of Industrial Engineering, pp. 1–5 (1982)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Norman, D.A.: The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyungdoh Kim
    • 1
  • Robert W. Proctor
    • 2
  • Gavriel Salvendy
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Industrial EngineeringPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychological SciencesPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  3. 3.Department of Industrial EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations