A large body of literature has evolved reporting about ergonomic
design of computer input devices (an overview in Hinckley
and Wigdor, 2012). One important design principle is to establish
an acceptable level of compatibility between the manipulation
task and the resulting action. Directional compatibility of motion,
also termed “kinesthetic correspondence” (Hinckley and Wigdor,
2012), among other issues, has been addressed experimentally in
a study by Worringham and Beringer (1998). Worringham et al.
found that directional compatibility should primarily be based on
the correspondence of motion of the relevant limb segment and
motion of the cursor in the visual field of the observer, rather than
on the correspondence between directions of motion of the input
device and directions of motion of the cursor on the display. Some
studies have addressed the effects of suboptimal visual feedback
conditions when using manual input devices. In a task using a
tablet computer, Causse et al. (2014) investigated the effect of
practice and visual feedback on manipulation performance when
the manipulation space and display space are dissociated. Causse
et al. (2014) found that practice improves manipulation performance
even in absence of visual feedback. However, practicing
with visual feedback leads to better accuracy. A study by Ferrel
et al. (2000) addressed the effects of changes in scale between
the space of the manipulating hand and target representation
space. Ferrel et al. (2000) used an electromagnetic stylus on a
digitizing tablet as an input device. The results of their study
demonstrated that adaptation to changes in control-to-display
gain is driven by visual feedback, rather than by kinematic feedback
during hand movements.