skip to main content
10.1145/3173574.3174220acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access
Honorable Mention

Observations on Typing from 136 Million Keystrokes

Published:21 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

We report on typing behaviour and performance of 168,000 volunteers in an online study. The large dataset allows detailed statistical analyses of keystroking patterns, linking them to typing performance. Besides reporting distributions and confirming some earlier findings, we report two new findings. First, letter pairs that are typed by different hands or fingers are more predictive of typing speed than, for example, letter repetitions. Second, rollover-typing, wherein the next key is pressed before the previous one is released, is sur- prisingly prevalent. Notwithstanding considerable variation in typing patterns, unsupervised clustering using normalised inter-key intervals reveals that most users can be divided into eight groups of typists that differ in performance, accuracy, hand and finger usage, and rollover. The code and dataset are released for scientific use.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. 2017. Rollover Key. (2017). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollover_(key) Last accessed 2017/09/12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Salil P Banerjee and Damon L Woodard. 2012. Biometric authentication and identification using keystroke dynamics: A survey. Journal of Pattern Recognition Research 7, 1 (2012), 116--139.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Edward Clarkson, Kent Lyons, James Clawson, and Thad Starner. 2007. Revisiting and validating a model of two-thumb text entry. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 163--166. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. August Dvorak, Nellie L Merrick, William L Dealey, and Gertrude C Ford. 1936. Typewriting behavior. Vol. 1. New York: American Book Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Anna Maria Feit, Daryl Weir, and Antti Oulasvirta. 2016. How we type: Movement strategies and performance in everyday typing. In Proceedings of the 2016 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 4262--4273. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S.M. Furnell, I. Papadopoulos, and P. Dowland. 2004. A long-term trial of alternative user authentication technologies. Information Management & Computer Security 12, 2 (2004), 178--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Donald R Gentner. 1983. Keystroke timing in transcription typing. In Cognitive aspects of skilled typewriting. Springer, 95--120.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Laura Germine, Ken Nakayama, Bradley C Duchaine, Christopher F Chabris, Garga Chatterjee, and Jeremy B Wilmer. 2012. Is the Web as good as the lab? Comparable performance from Web and lab in cognitive/perceptual experiments. Psychonomic bulletin & review 19, 5 (2012), 847--857.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Mayank Goel, Alex Jansen, Travis Mandel, Shwetak N Patel, and Jacob O Wobbrock. 2013. ContextType: using hand posture information to improve mobile touch screen text entry. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2795--2798. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Joachim Grabowski. 2008. The internal structure of university students' keyboard skills. Journal of writing research 1, 1 (2008).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. David Graff and Christopher Cieri. 2003. English gigaword LDC2003T05. (2003). https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC2003T05Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Jonathan T Grudin. 1983. Error patterns in novice and skilled transcription typing. In Cognitive aspects of skilled typewriting. Springer, 121--143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Niels Henze, Enrico Rukzio, and Susanne Boll. 2012. Observational and experimental investigation of typing behaviour using virtual keyboards for mobile devices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2659--2668. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Yuzuru Hiraga, Yoshihiko Ono, and Yamada-Hisao. 1980. An analysis of the standard English keyboard. In Proceedings of the 8th conference on Computational linguistics -. Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, 242. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Rick Joyce and Gopal Gupta. 1990. Identity authentication based on keystroke latencies. Commun. ACM 33, 2 (1990), 168--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Akiyo Kano, Janet C Read, Alan Dix, and I Scott MacKenzie. 2007. ExpECT: an expanded error categorisation method for text input. In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI... but not as we know it-Volume 1. British Computer Society, 147--156. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Clare-Marie Karat, Christine Halverson, Daniel Horn, and John Karat. 1999. Patterns of entry and correction in large vocabulary continuous speech recognition systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 568--575. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Marcus Karnan, Muthuramalingam Akila, and Nishara Krishnaraj. 2011. Biometric personal authentication using keystroke dynamics: A review. Applied Soft Computing 11, 2 (2011), 1565--1573. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Leonard Kaufman and Peter J. Rousseeuw. 1990. Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis. John Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Nina Keith and K Anders Ericsson. 2007. A deliberate practice account of typing proficiency in everyday typists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 13, 3 (2007), 135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Sunjun Kim, Jeongmin Son, Geehyuk Lee, Hwan Kim, and Woohun Lee. 2013. TapBoard: making a touch screen keyboard more touchable. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 553--562. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Per Ola Kristensson and Keith Vertanen. 2012. Performance Comparisons of Phrase Sets and Presentation Styles for Text Entry Evaluations. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 29--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Vladimir I Levenshtein. 1966. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. In Soviet physics doklady, Vol. 10. 707--710.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Gordon D Logan, Jana E Ulrich, and Dakota RB Lindsey. 2016. Different (Key) Strokes for Different Folks: How Standard and Nonstandard Typists Balance Fitts' Law and Hick's Law. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. I Scott MacKenzie and R William Soukoreff. 2002. A model of two-thumb text entry. Space 67 (2002), 18--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. I. Scott MacKenzie and R. William Soukoreff. 2003. Phrase Sets for Evaluating Text Entry Techniques. In CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 754--755. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Martin Maechler. 2017. clara function | R Documentation. (2017). https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/ cluster/versions/2.0.6/topics/clara Last accessed 2017/09/18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Jochen Musch and Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2000. A Brief History of Web Experimenting. In Psychological Experiments on the Internet, Michael H Birnbaum (Ed.). Elsevier, 61--87.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Ngoc Tran Nguyen. 2016. Distance-based classification of keystroke dynamics. In First International Workshop on Pattern Recognition. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 100111E--100111E.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Katharina Reinecke and Krzysztof Z Gajos. 2015. LabintheWild: Conducting large-scale online experiments with uncompensated samples. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. ACM, 1364--1378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2000. The Web Experiment Method: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Solutions. In Psychological Experiments on the Internet., Michael H. Birnbaum (Ed.). Academic Press, Chapter 4, 89--117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Martina Rieger and Victoria KE Bart. 2016. Typing Style and the Use of Different Sources of Information during Typing: An Investigation Using Self-Reports. Frontiers in psychology 7 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Timothy A Salthouse. 1984. Effects of age and skill in typing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113, 3 (1984), 345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Timothy A Salthouse. 1986. Perceptual, cognitive, and motoric aspects of transcription typing. Psychological bulletin 99, 3 (1986), 303.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Frode Eika Sandnes. 2005. Evaluating Mobile Text Entry Strategies with Finite State Automata. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices &; Services (MobileHCI '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 115--121. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. LH Shaffer and J Hardwick. 1968. Typing performance as a function of text. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 20, 4 (1968), 360--369.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Paul D Varcholik, Joseph J LaViola, and Charles E Hughes. 2012. Establishing a baseline for text entry for a multi-touch virtual keyboard. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 70, 10 (2012), 657--672. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. K. Vertanen and P.O. Kristensson. 2011. A versatile dataset for text entry evaluations based on genuine mobile emails. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. ACM, 295--298. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jacob O Wobbrock. 2007. Measures of text entry performance. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jacob O Wobbrock and Brad A Myers. 2006. Analyzing the input stream for character-level errors in unconstrained text entry evaluations. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 13, 4 (2006), 458--489. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Changxu Wu and Yili Liu. 2008. Queuing network modeling of transcription typing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 15, 1 (2008), 6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Xin Yi, Chun Yu, Weinan Shi, Xiaojun Bi, and Yuanchun Shi. 2017. Word Clarity As a Metric in Sampling Keyboard Test Sets. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4216--4228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Ying Yin, Tom Yu Ouyang, Kurt Partridge, and Shumin Zhai. 2013. Making touchscreen keyboards adaptive to keys, hand postures, and individuals: a hierarchical spatial backoff model approach. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2775--2784. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Observations on Typing from 136 Million Keystrokes

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      8489 pages
      ISBN:9781450356206
      DOI:10.1145/3173574

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 21 April 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate666of2,590submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader