科技日新月異，觸控面板成為行動裝置的新寵兒，其中又以平板電腦堪稱應用的翹楚，IDC市場研究公司在五月預計今年全球平板電腦總銷售量成長58.7%達到2億2千多萬台，且平板電腦的市場需求將會超越筆記型電腦。如此普及的情形，對於如何增加文字輸入績效也在人機互動領域上產生新的議題。
因此，本研究目的在於以人因工程的角度，探討在常見的使用姿勢下(標準打字姿勢與膝上打字姿勢)與平板電腦的互動情形。利用在虛擬鍵盤進行不同打字回饋模式的設計(視覺、聽覺與觸覺回饋)，評估是否可以經由附加回饋模式的方式來提升平板電腦的易用性，改善使用者經驗。
本實驗採隨機化完全區集及受測者間的實驗設計，實驗變數為「回饋模式」與「打字姿勢」，共有8種模式兩種打字姿勢。受測對象為年齡介於20-35歲，符合視力、聽力及英文打字能力標準共16人，每位受測者須針對不同回饋模式進行10分鐘看文章打字作業，透過記錄與比較在各任務進行中之打字績效指標與眼動資訊的變化，並配合階段任務後受測者所填寫的客觀問卷(NASA_TLX 心智負荷問卷、SUS易用性問卷)結果來進行多面向之綜合評估。
研究結果顯示，回饋模式的顯示方式，對於打字績效指標、眼動資訊與易用性指標有顯著性的影響，以總體而言，附加聽覺回饋的虛擬鍵盤，在打字績效的停置時間與準確都以及使用性主觀性指標上都有較好的表現;附加觸覺回饋的鍵盤在反應時間與按鍵位置上也有較好的績效但在停置時間與使用性主觀指標卻有較差的表現，此外，研究結果也顯示，回饋模式比較容易在主觀性指標上有顯著的差異，因此推論回饋模式在對於使用經驗上比起對實際作業績效有較大的改善或轉變。

Tablet PC is expected to become the next generation of new computer and information technology products. Its prevalence brings new changes to industrial ecology, consumer habits and human-computer interaction. It has been showed in several consumer market surveys that the current generations of Tablet PC trends to produce unpleasant user experiences during conventional typing activities.
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the interaction between user and Tablet PC during text-entry tasks withtwo common postures (desk posture and lap posture). Eight different types of the feedback design for virtual keyboard (non, visual, auditory, tactile, visual plus auditory, visual plus tactile, auditory plus tactile, visual plus auditory and tactile ) were evaluated with respect to the performance and usability. Typing performance matrices and self-perceived evaluations were recorded, along with eyetracking signals.
The results showed that the feedback design has significant impacts on typing performance, eye movement and subjective perceived preferances. Overall, auditory feedback is better in terms of typing performance and subjective perceived preferances, so the tactile feedback enhance the accuracy pressing location, but has worse results in most performance related metrices compared to its auditory couterpart. Furthermore, the difference in feedback design trend to be easilerly sperated based on preference compared with the results from objective performance.The situation is an interesting observation could mean adequate feedback design can improve overall user experience instead of limiting to real typing result.

中文文獻
吳智鴻, 曾奕霖, 劉長儒 & 徐日薇, 2012. 結合眼動與腦波之注意力指標建構ipad電子書最佳色彩配置. 聯大學報.
林碩盈, 2012. 創新觸覺回饋觸碰鍵盤設計與使用效益研究.
陳學志, 賴惠德 & 邱發忠, 2010. 眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用. 教育科學研究期刊, 55, 39-68.
蔡旺晉, 羅麗雯 & 李傳房, 2010. 操作小型觸控螢幕按鍵與視覺回饋之使用性探討. 人因工程學刊, 12 卷 1 期 P56 - 67.
賴彥中. 2008. 觸控回饋機制引領人機介面進入新領域 工研院電子報.
英文文獻
Brooke, J., 1986. Sus - a quick and dirty usability scale. United Kingdom.
Chaparro, B., Nguyen, B., Phan, M.,Smith, A., & Teves, J. , 2010. Keyboard performance: Ipad versus netbook. Usability News, 12 (2) Available from: http://www.surl.org/usabilitynews/122/ipadtyping.asp.
Chowdown, 2011. What's your favourite position with ipad? [online]. http://www.ipadforums.net/apple-ipad-polls/16088-whats-your-favourite-position-ipad.html [Accessed Access Date
Cross, J., 2010. Ipad vs. Netbook: It's a close call [online]. http://www.pcworld.com/article/193352/ipad_vs_netbook.html [Accessed Access Date
Das, A. & Stuerzlinger, W., 2007. A cognitive simulation model for novice text entry on cell phone keypads. Proceedings of the 14th European conference on Cognitive ergonomics. London, United Kingdom, 141-147.
Deron, M. 2000. How important is visual feedback when using a touch screen Usability News.
Duchowski, A.T., 2007. Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.
Elmer-Dewitt, P., 2011. Nielsen: 51% of ipad use is in bed or in front of the tv. Available from: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/19/nielsen-51-of-ipad-use-is-in-bed-or-in-front-of-the-tv/.
Erp, J.B.F.V., Kyung, K.-U., Kassner, S., Carter, J., Brewster, S., Weber, G. & Andrew, I., 2012. Setting the standards for haptic and tactile interactions: Iso's work. Proceedings of the 2010 international conference on Haptics - generating and perceiving tangible. Amsterdam, 353-358.
Giel, K.E., Friederich, H.C., Teufel, M., Hautzinger, M., Enck, P. & Zipfel, S., 2011. Attentional processing of food pictures in individuals with anorexia nervosa--an eye-tracking study. Biol Psychiatry, 69 (7), 661-7 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21109232.
Hancock, M.S., Shen, C., Forlines, C. & Ryall, K., 2005. Exploring non-speech auditory feedback at an interactive multi-user tabletop. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2005. Victoria, British Columbia, 41-50.
Hart, S.G., 1988. Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Human mental workload. 139-183.
Hart, S.G., 2006. Nasa-task load index (nasa-tlx); 20 years later. In Center, N.-a.R. ed. CA.
Hfes, 2007. Ansi/hfes 100-2007-human factors engineering of computer workstations. Santa Monica.
Hoggan, E., Brewster, S.A. & Johnston, J., 2008. Investigating the effectiveness of tactile feedback for mobile touchscreens. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Florence, Italy, 1573-1582.
Idc, 2013. Idc forecasts worldwide tablet shipments to surpass portable pc shipments in 2013, total pc shipments in 2015 [online]. IDC. Available from: http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24129713 [Accessed Access Date
Julie, J., Kathlene, E.V., J., E.P., Mahima, A., Leon, B., Thitima, K., P., M.K. & Francois, S., 2004. The effects of multimodal feedback on older adults' task performance given varying levels of computer experience. Taylor & Francis, 23, 247-264.
Keller, C., 2011. Using a familiar risk comparison within a risk ladder to improve risk understanding by low numerates: A study of visual attention. Risk Anal, 31 (7), 1043-54 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21284684.
King, T., Knowles, B., Hutto, G. & Ryu, Y.S., 2010. Posture comparision on ipad text entry performance.
Korte, E.M.D., Huysmans, M.A., Jong, A.M.D., Ven, J.G.M.V.D. & Ruijsendaal, M., 2012. Effects of four types of non-obtrusive feedback on computer behaviour, task performance and comfort. Applied ergonomics, 43 (2), 344-53 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21726853.
Kujala, T., 2009. Efficiency of visual time-sharing behavior –the effects of menu structure on poi search tasks while driving. International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. Germany.
Kujala, T. & Saariluoma, P., 2011. Effects of menu structure and touch screen scrolling style on the variability of glance durations during in-vehicle visual search tasks. Ergonomics, 54 (8), 716-32 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21846310.
Kwon, S., Lee, D. & Chung, M.K., 2009. Effect of key size and activation area on the performance of a regional error correction method in a touch-screen qwerty keyboard. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39 (5), 888-893.
Labor, U.D.D.O., 1997. Working safely with video display terminals. OSHA_3092.
Lee, J.-H., Poliakoff, E. & Spence, C., 2009. The effect of multimodal feedback presented via a touch screen on the performance of older adults. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Haptic and Audio Interaction Design. Dresden, Germany, 128-135.
Mackenzie, I.S., 2002. Kspc (keystrokes per character) as a characteristic of text entry techniques. Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction. USA: York University, 195-210.
Mcadam, C. & Brewster, S., 2011. Multimodal feedback for tabletop interactions. Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. Kobe, Japan: ACM, 274-275.

Majaranta, P., Aula, A. & Räihä, K.-J., 2004. Effects of feedback on eye typing with a short dwell time. Proceedings of the 2004 symposium on Eye tracking research and applications. San Antonio, Texas, 139-146.
O'regan, J.K. & Lévy-Schoen, A., 1987. Eye-movement strategy and tactics in word recognition and reading. Attention and performance 12: The psychology of reading, 363-383.
Page, J., Bates, V., Long, G., Dawes, P. & Tipton, M., 2011. Beach lifeguards: Visual search patterns, detection rates and the influence of experience. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 31 (3), 216-24 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21410495.
Pino, C. & Kavasidis, I., 2012. Improving mobile device interaction by eye tracking analysis
Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. 1199–1202.
Pitts, M.J., Burnett, G., Skrypchuk, L., Wellings, T., Attridge, A. & Williams, M.A., 2012. Visual–haptic feedback interaction in automotive touchscreens. Displays, 33 (1), 7-16.
Poole, A. & Ball, L.J., 2005. Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Current status and future prospects. UK
Rayner, K., 1998a. Eye movements in reading and information processing : 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin..
Rayner, K., 1998b. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
Schuck, M.M., 1994. The use of auditory feedback in the design of touch-input devices. Applied Ergonomics, 25, 59--62.
Seo, H.S., Roidl, E., Muller, F. & Negoias, S., 2010. Odors enhance visual attention to congruent objects. Appetite, 54 (3), 544-9 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20176065.
Silfverberg, M., 2003. Using mobile keypads with limited visual feedback:Implications to handheld and wearable devices. Finland.
Visschers, V.H., Hess, R. & Siegrist, M., 2010. Health motivation and product design determine consumers' visual attention to nutrition information on food products. Public Health Nutr, 13 (7), 1099-106 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20100390.
Vitense, H.S., Jacko, J.A. & Emery, V.K., 2003. Multimodal feedback: An assessment of performance and mental workload. Ergonomics, 46 (1-3), 68-87 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12554399.
Wengelin, A., Torrance, M., Holmqvist, K., Simpson, S., Galbraith, D., Johansson, V. & Johansson, R., 2009. Combined eyetracking and keystroke-logging methods for studying cognitive processes in text production. Behav Res Methods, 41 (2), 337-51 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19363174.
Yvonne, R., Helen, S. & Jennifer, P., 2007. Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction: John Wiley & Sons Inc.