Next Article in Journal
Application of Thermal Methods to Analyze the Properties of Coffee Silverskin and Oil Extracted from the Studied Roasting By-Product
Next Article in Special Issue
Gaze-Head Input: Examining Potential Interaction with Immediate Experience Sampling in an Autonomous Vehicle
Previous Article in Journal
Hydrophobic Fluorinated Porous Organic Frameworks for Enhanced Adsorption of Nerve Agents
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Novel Framework for Identifying Customers’ Unmet Needs on Online Social Media Using Context Tree
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Voice as a Mouse Click: Usability and Effectiveness of Simplified Hands-Free Gaze-Voice Selection

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10(24), 8791; https://doi.org/10.3390/app10248791
by Darisy G. Zhao 1, Nikita D. Karikov 1, Eugeny V. Melnichuk 1, Boris M. Velichkovsky 1,2 and Sergei L. Shishkin 1,3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10(24), 8791; https://doi.org/10.3390/app10248791
Submission received: 24 November 2020 / Revised: 5 December 2020 / Accepted: 7 December 2020 / Published: 9 December 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue User Experience for Advanced Human–Computer Interaction)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

clear paper, only few comments (see file attached)

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see our point-by-point response in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

applsci-1032032

Title: Voice as a Mouse Click: Usability and Effectiveness of Simplified Hands-Free Gaze-Voice Selection

 

The authors present the user study evaluating different interaction modalities by the eye-tracker. Voice interaction modality was compared to the traditional mouse interaction modality.

All the references are accounted for in the manuscript.

 

To further improve this paper, the authors can consider the following suggestions:

  1. The authors should briefly explain how voice recognition was implemented. Did the voice recognition success rate have any influence on the experiment?
  2. What method was used for counter balancing the conditions?
  3. Was there any influence on the eye-tracking accuracy by external conditions (e.g. lighting, glasses, contact lenses)? The authors should address possible study limitations in a separate chapter/subchapter.
  4. The authors should add more details to the questionnaire used to assess the convenience of each interaction modality. (e.g. exact question used, Likert scale meaning)

Author Response

Please see our point-by-point response in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop