|
Keying performance
ANOVAs (Analysis of Variance) were calculated to determine
signifant differences in performance between subjects, keyboards,
and sessions
Text Entry;
Text entry throughput, calculated in words per minute (see Figure
6, and Appendix A), was significantly higher on the traditional
keyboard than on the Kinesis keyboard (F'=41.854, p= .0001). The
differences in errors for text entry between the two keyboards
were not significant (see Figure 7). During the text entry
session, the number of errors substantially decreased on the
Kinesis keyboard, but not on the traditional keyboard.
Text Keying Throughput
Figure 6
Text Keying Errors
Figure 7
Random Letter Entry:
Random letter entry calculated in keystrokes per session (see
Figure 8, and Appendix A), was significantly higher on the
traditional keyboard There was a slight but insignificant
increase in the number of keystrokes in the last session on the
traditional keyboard (F = 26.807, p= .0001). There were no
significant differences in errors for random letter entry between
the two keyboards (see Figure 9).
Random Letter Keying Performance
Figure 8
Random Letter Keying Errors
Figure 9
Previous page | Next page
|
