![](bg8.png)
less interactions were required of the user to perform
their specific tasks. More detailed results of the per-
sonalisation component of our system can be found in
other publications (Weakliam et al., 2005a), (Weak-
liam et al., 2005b). As expected, this reduced amount
of spatial content combined with multimodal interac-
tion resulted in an overall feeling of increased effi-
ciency and ease of use of the system for all subjects.
5 CONCLUSION
Multimodal interfaces are an exciting research para-
digm within the field of Human Computer Interac-
tion. Mobile GISs that process speech and pen input
have been shown to be more flexible, efficient, robust
and user-friendly. We have developed a multimodal
mobile GIS that can be used by both expert and non-
expert users in the field. Our system provides users
with the flexibility to choose their preferred mode of
interaction depending on their current task and envi-
ronment. Our evaluation showed a complete prefer-
ence for multimodal over unimodal interaction and
also that within a mobile environment it is easier to
walk and speak than walk and point. Moreover, we
have combined our multimodal interface with person-
alisation services, further improving the usability and
efficiency of our system. Providing users with per-
sonalised spatial data allows us to significantly reduce
the amount of information being sent to their mobile
client and reduces the complexity of the interface.
REFERENCES
Abowd, G., Atkeson, C., Hong, J., Long, S., Kooper,
R., and Pinkerton, M. (1997). Cyberguide: A mo-
bile context-aware tour guide. Wireless Networks,
3(5):421–433.
Blaser, A., Sester, M., and Egenhofer, M. (2000). Visualiza-
tion in an early stage of the problem solving process
in gis. Computers and Geosciences, 26(1):57–66.
Cohen, P., Johnston, M., McGee, D., Oviatt, S., Pittman,
J., Smith, I., Chen, L., and Clow, J. (1997). Quickset:
Multimodal interaction for distributed applications. In
5th ACM Conference on Multimedia, pages 31–40,
Seattle, Washington, USA.
Cohen, P., McGee, D., and Clow, J. (2000). The efficiency
of multimodal interaction for a map-based task. In
6th International Conference on Applied Natural Lan-
guage Processing, pages 331–338, Seattle, Washing-
ton, USA.
Fuhrmann, S., MacEachren, A., Dou, J., Wang, K., and
Cox, A. (2005). Gesture and speech-based maps to
support use of gis for crisis management: A user
study. In Auto-Carto 2005, Las Vegas, USA.
GoogleMaps (2005). http://maps.google.com/.
Goy, A. and Magro, D. (2004). Star: A smart tourist agent
recommender. In European Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (ECAI 04), pages 44–50, Valencia, Spain.
IBM (2005). http://www.ibm.com.
Jost, M., Haussler, J., Merdes, M., and Malaka, R. (2005).
Multimodal interaction for pedestrians: An evaluation
study. In 10th International Conference on Intelligent
User Interfaces, pages 59–66, San Diego, California,
USA.
OGC (2005). http://www.opengeospatial.org/.
OpenMap (2005). http://openmap.bbn.com/.
Oviatt, S. (1996). Multimodal interfaces for dynamic inter-
active maps. In SIGCHI conference on Human Fac-
tors in Computing Systems, pages 95–102, Vancouver,
Canada.
Oviatt, S. (1999). Mutual disambiguation of recognition
errors in a multimodal architecture. In The Conference
on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’99),
pages 576–583, Pennsylvania, USA.
Oviatt, S. and Cohen, P. (2000). Multimodal interfaces that
process what comes naturally. Communications of the
ACM, 43(3):45–53.
Rauschert, I., Agrawal, P., Sharma, R., Fuhrmann, S.,
Brewer, I., MacEachren, A., Wang, H., and Cai, G.
(2002a). Designing a human-centered, multimodal gis
interface to support emergency management. In 10th
ACM International Symposium on Advances in Ge-
ographic Information Systems, pages 119–124, Vir-
ginia, USA.
Rauschert, I., Sharma, R., Fuhrmann, S., Brewer, I., and
MacEachren, A. (2002b). Approaching a new multi-
modal gis-interface. In 2nd International Conference
on GIS (GIScience) , Colorado, USA.
Rugelbak, J. and Hamnes, K. (2003). Multimodal interac-
tion - will users tap and speak simultaneously. Telek-
tronikk, 2:118–124.
Visser, U. and Stuckenschmidt, H. (2002). Interoperability
in gis - enabling technologies. In 5th Agile Conference
on Geographic Information Science, pages 291–297,
Mallorca, Spain.
Weakliam, J., Bertolotto, M., and Wilson, D. (2005a). Im-
plicit interaction profiling for recommending spatial
content. In ACMGIS ’05 (in press), Bremen, Germany.
Weakliam, J., Lynch, D., Doyle, J., Bertolotto, M., and
Wilson, D. (2005b). Delivering personalized context-
aware spatial information to mobile devices. In 5th In-
ternational Workshop on Web and Wireless Geograph-
ical Information Systems (W2GIS ’05), pages 194–
205, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Zipf, A. (2002). User-adaptive maps for location-based ser-
vices (lbs) for tourism. In 9th International Confer-
ence for Information and Communication Technolo-
gies in Tourism (ENTER 2002), pages 329–338, Inns-
bruck, Austria.
ICEIS 2006 - HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION
78