触觉、听觉还是视觉?:人工装配工作场所的最佳误差反馈

Markus Funk, Juana Heusler, Elif Akcay, Klaus Weiland, A. Schmidt
{"title":"触觉、听觉还是视觉?:人工装配工作场所的最佳误差反馈","authors":"Markus Funk, Juana Heusler, Elif Akcay, Klaus Weiland, A. Schmidt","doi":"10.1145/2910674.2910683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are observing a trend that more and more manual assembly workplaces are equipped with sensor technology to assist workers during complex work tasks. These assistive systems mostly use visual feedback for providing assembly instructions or hinting at errors. However, a red light indicating an error might not always be the best solution for communicating that an error was made, or might be overlooked in stressful situations. Therefore, we extended an assitsive system to compare haptic, auditory, and visual error feedback at the manual assembly workplace. Through two user studies, we first determine suitable variants for each error feedback modality and second compare the error feedback modalities against each other. The results show that haptic feedback is appropriate for retaining the worker's privacy, and auditory feedback is perceived as most distracting. The subjective feedback reveals interesting insights for future research in communicating errors as a combination of haptic and visual feedback might lead to noticing an error faster.","PeriodicalId":359504,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Haptic, Auditory, or Visual?: Towards Optimal Error Feedback at Manual Assembly Workplaces\",\"authors\":\"Markus Funk, Juana Heusler, Elif Akcay, Klaus Weiland, A. Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2910674.2910683\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We are observing a trend that more and more manual assembly workplaces are equipped with sensor technology to assist workers during complex work tasks. These assistive systems mostly use visual feedback for providing assembly instructions or hinting at errors. However, a red light indicating an error might not always be the best solution for communicating that an error was made, or might be overlooked in stressful situations. Therefore, we extended an assitsive system to compare haptic, auditory, and visual error feedback at the manual assembly workplace. Through two user studies, we first determine suitable variants for each error feedback modality and second compare the error feedback modalities against each other. The results show that haptic feedback is appropriate for retaining the worker's privacy, and auditory feedback is perceived as most distracting. The subjective feedback reveals interesting insights for future research in communicating errors as a combination of haptic and visual feedback might lead to noticing an error faster.\",\"PeriodicalId\":359504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2910674.2910683\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2910674.2910683","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

我们观察到一种趋势,即越来越多的手工组装工作场所配备了传感器技术,以协助工人完成复杂的工作任务。这些辅助系统大多使用视觉反馈来提供组装指令或提示错误。然而,指示错误的红灯可能并不总是传达错误的最佳解决方案,或者在紧张的情况下可能会被忽略。因此,我们扩展了一个辅助系统来比较手动装配工作场所的触觉、听觉和视觉误差反馈。通过两项用户研究,我们首先确定了每种误差反馈模式的合适变体,然后将误差反馈模式相互比较。结果表明,触觉反馈适合保护员工的隐私,而听觉反馈被认为是最分散注意力的。主观反馈为未来交流错误的研究提供了有趣的见解,因为触觉和视觉反馈的结合可能会导致更快地注意到错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Haptic, Auditory, or Visual?: Towards Optimal Error Feedback at Manual Assembly Workplaces
We are observing a trend that more and more manual assembly workplaces are equipped with sensor technology to assist workers during complex work tasks. These assistive systems mostly use visual feedback for providing assembly instructions or hinting at errors. However, a red light indicating an error might not always be the best solution for communicating that an error was made, or might be overlooked in stressful situations. Therefore, we extended an assitsive system to compare haptic, auditory, and visual error feedback at the manual assembly workplace. Through two user studies, we first determine suitable variants for each error feedback modality and second compare the error feedback modalities against each other. The results show that haptic feedback is appropriate for retaining the worker's privacy, and auditory feedback is perceived as most distracting. The subjective feedback reveals interesting insights for future research in communicating errors as a combination of haptic and visual feedback might lead to noticing an error faster.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信