Comparing the effects of visual-auditory and visual-tactile feedback on user performance: a meta-analysis

  • Authors:
  • Jennifer L. Burke;Matthew S. Prewett;Ashley A. Gray;Liuquin Yang;Frederick R. B. Stilson;Michael D. Coovert;Linda R. Elliot;Elizabeth Redden

  • Affiliations:
  • University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl;ARL/HRED @ SAIC, Fort Benning, GA;ARL/HRED @ SAIC, Fort Benning, GA

  • Venue:
  • Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Multimodal interfaces
  • Year:
  • 2006

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In a meta-analysis of 43 studies, we examined the effects of multimodal feedback on user performance, comparing visual-auditory and visual-tactile feedback to visual feedback alone. Results indicate that adding an additional modality to visual feedback improves performance overall. Both visual-auditory feedback and visual-tactile feedback provided advantages in reducing reaction times and improving performance scores, but were not effective in reducing error rates. Effects are moderated by task type, workload, and number of tasks. Visual-auditory feedback is most effective when a single task is being performed (g = .87), and under normal workload conditions (g = .71). Visual-tactile feedback is more effective when multiple tasks are begin performed (g = .77) and workload conditions are high (g = .84). Both types of multimodal feedback are effective for target acquisition tasks; but vary in effectiveness for other task types. Implications for practice and research are discussed.