การศึกษาประสิทธิภาพของอุปกรณ์นำเข้าข้อมูลสำหรับการสอบข้อเขียน- การเปรียบเทียบระหว่างอุปกรณ์การเขียนและอุปกรณ์การพิมพ์
Article Sidebar
เผยแพร่แล้ว:
ส.ค. 20, 2021
คำสำคัญ:
การประเมินผล การตรวจคลื่นไฟฟ้ากล้ามเนื้อ การออกแบบด้วยหลักการยศาสตร์ ปฏิสัมพันธ์ระหว่างมนุษย์กับคอมพิวเตอร์
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
การสอบเป็นเครื่องมือในการประเมินผลของมหาวิทยาลัย ซึ่งสามารถทำได้โดยใช้อุปกรณ์ป้อนข้อมูลประเภทต่าง ๆ ในการทำข้อสอบ การศึกษานี้เป็นการตรวจสอบการใช้อุปกรณ์ป้อนข้อมูลแบบดิจิทัลว่าจะมีผลต่อการใช้กล้ามเนื้อมากกว่าการใช้เครื่องมือแบบดั่งเดิมหรือไม่ งานวิจัยได้ตรวจสอบคลื่นไฟฟ้ากล้ามเนื้อ ที่ตำแหน่งกล้ามเนื้อ trapezius (TRAP) กล้ามเนื้อ biceps brachii (BB) กล้ามเนื้อ flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) กล้ามเนื้อ extensor Carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) และกล้ามเนื้อ extensor digitorum Communis (EDC) ในขณะสอบข้อเขียนโดยใช้อุปกรณ์ป้อนข้อมูลแบบดิจิทัล ได้แก่ Boogie Board, Chromebook, iPad pro, keyboard notebook, Ballpoint Pen และ Yoga book ผลการวิจัยพบว่า นักศึกษามหาวิทยาลัยจำนวน 20 คน ที่ใช้ Boogie Board และ Ballpoint Pen จะมีการใช้กล้ามเนื้อในระดับมากที่สุด ซึ่งเมื่อใช้ Boogie Board และ Ballpoint Pen กลุ่มตัวอย่างมีแนวโน้มใช้กล้ามเนื้อ FDS และ ECRB ในระดับมากที่สุด ตลอดทั้ง Boogie Board ยังส่งผลให้มีการใช้กล้ามเนื้อ BB ในระดับมากที่สุดอย่างต่อเนื่อง นอกจากนี้เมื่อใช้ Yoga Book กลุ่มตัวอย่างมีแนวโน้มใช้กล้ามเนื้อ TRAP, FDS และ EDC เพิ่มขึ้น ในทางตรงกันข้ามเมื่อเป็นการใช้ Chromebook และ iPad pro จะส่งผลให้การใช้กล้ามเนื้อ FDS และ EDC ลดลงอย่างต่อเนื่อง อย่างไรก็ตามเมื่อเป็นการพิมพ์บนคีย์บอร์ดของโน๊ตบุ๊ค กลุ่มตัวอย่างใช้กล้ามเนื้อ BB, FDS และ ECRB น้อยลง ดังนั้นจึงอาจสรุปได้ว่า เมื่อใดที่เป็นการเขียนที่ใช้เวลานาน การใช้คีย์บอร์ดโน๊ตบุ๊คอาจเป็นวิธีที่เหมาะสมมากกว่าการเขียนด้วยลายมือ โดยเฉพาะในด้านการศึกษา ซึ่งการค้นพบนี้ยังชี้ให้เห็นว่าอุปกรณ์นำเข้าข้อมูลที่เป็นการเขียนด้วยลายมือ จะใช้พลังงานมากขึ้นและอาจทำให้เกิดความเสียหายของกล้ามเนื้อในขณะทำงานเขียนด้วยลายมือ
Article Details
บท
Original Articles
References
1 Kurtz, B.L., Esmaili, A. Tate, S.R. Active Learning During Lecture Using Tablets. SIGCSE '14 Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium Computer science education. 2014; 121-126.
2 Maiorana, C. Sgarbossa, L. and Salomoni, V. New methodologies in teaching e-structural mechanics using WWW, Comput Appl Eng Educ. 2008; 16, 189-210.
3 Ravindra, S., Hoffmann, E.R., Luximon, A. Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance. Applied Ergonomics. 2009; 40(2): 292-301.
4 Kim, J.H., et al. Differences in typing forces, muscle activity, comfort, and typing performances among virtual, notebook, and desktop keyboards. Applied Ergonomics. 2014 (45): 1406-1413.
5 Zabramski S, Neelakannan S. Paper equal screen; A comparison of a pen-based figural creativity test in computerized and paper form. Proceeding DESIRE '11 Proceedings of the Second Conference on Creativity and Innovation in Design. 2011: 47-50.
6 Huff, K. C. The comparison of mobile devices to computers for web-based assessments. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 49, 208-212.
7 Dualde, B.J.V., Buendia, F., Lemus, L., Cano, J.-C., Gutierrez Cuba, J., Lopez-Malo, A., et al. Redesigning engineering courses by introducing digital ink technology. Paper presented at the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference FIE, October 23-26, 2013, Oklahoma, USA.
8 Kowalski S.E. Kowlski F.V. Gardner T.Q. Lessons Learned When Gathering Real-Time Formative Assessment in the University Classroom Using Tablet PCs. Frontiers in Education Conference, 2009. FIE '09. 39th IEEE, 18-21 Oct. 1-5.
9 Isabwe GM et al. Using Assessment for Learning Mathematics with Mobile Tablet Based Solutions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2014; 9 (2): 29-36.
10 Annett, M., Anderson, F., Bischof, W.F., Gupta, A. The Pen is Mightier: Understanding Stylus Behaviour While inking on tablets. Proceeding of Graphics Interface Conference 2014, 7-9 May, Canadian Information Processing Society Toronto, Ont., Canada, 193-200.
11 Mogey N. Typing compared with handwriting for essay examination at university: letting the students choose. ALT-J. Research in Learning Technology. 2010; 18(1): 29-47.
12 Moge N. Students’ choices between typing and handwriting in examination. Active learning in higher education. 2012; 13(2): 117-128.
13 ANSI/HFES100-2007 Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Santa Monica, CA, USA. 2007.
14 Gerard, M.J. Armstrong, T.J. Franzblau, A. Martin, B.J. Rempel, D.M.. The effects of key switch stiffness on typing force, finger electromyography, and subjective discomfort. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1999; 60 (6): 762–769.
15 Gerard, M.J., Armstrong, T.J., Martin, B.J., Rempel, D.M. The effects of work pace on intra-subject and inter-subject keying force, electromyography, and fatigue. Hum. Factors, in press. 2001.
16 Pereira, A., Hsieh, C.-M., Laroche, C., Rempel, D. The effect of keyboard key spacing on typing speed, error, usability, and biomechanics, part 2: vertical spacing. Hum. Fact. J. Hum. Fact. Ergonom. Soc. 2013; 56(4):752-759.
17 Perry, R. "How products are made". Ballpoint pen. High Beam Research, Inc. 1998.
18 Sassoon R. The art and science of handwriting. Oxford: Intellect; 2004.
19 Goonetilleke RS, Hoffmann ER, Luximon A. Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance. Appl Ergon 2009;40(2):292–301.
20 International Organization for Standardization. Ergonomics of human—system interaction: Part 410. Design criteria for physical input devices (Reference No. ISO9241-410: 2008). Geneva, Switzerland: Author 2008.
21 Almeida, P.H., Cruz D.M., Magna L.A., Ferrigno I.S. An electromyographic analysis of two handwriting grasp patterns. J. lectromyogr Kinesiol. 2013; 23(4):838-43.
22 Leonard JH, Kok KS, Ayiesha R, et al. Prolonged writing task: comparison of
electromyographic analysis of upper trapezius muscle in subjects with or without neck pain. Clin Ther 2010;161(1):29–33.
23 Steinhart, N. S., Leurer, K.M., Analysis of proximal and distal muscle activity during handwriting tasks. Am J Occup Ther 2007;61(4):392–8.
24 Basmajian, J.V., De Luca, C.J. (1985). Muscles Alive: Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography. Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore.
25 Perotto, A., Delagi, E.F. Anatomical Guide for the Electromyographer: the Limbs and Trunk. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill., USA. 1994.
26 Jensen, C., Vasseljen, O., Westgaard, R.H., The influence of electrode position on bipolar surface electromyogram recordings of the upper trapezius muscle. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 1993;67 (3): 266-273.
27 Criswell, E., Cram’s introduction to Surface Electromyography. 2nded.: United States of America 2011.
28 Hermens H, Freriks B, Merletti R, Stegeman D, Blok J, Rau G. European recommendations for surface electromyography – SENIAM 8. Enschede: Roessing Research and Development B.V. 1999.
29 Peter, K. The ABC of EMG-A Practical Introduction to Kinesiological Electromyography. Noraxon INC. USA. 2005.
30 Jonsson, B. Measurement and evaluation of local muscular strain in the shoulder during contained work. J. Hum. Ergol. 1982; 11 (1): 73-88.
31 HarmsRingdahl, K., Ekholm, J., Schuldt, K., Linder, J., Ericson, M.O., Assessment of jet pilots’ upper trapezius load calibrated to maximal voluntary contraction and a standardized load. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol 1996;6 (1): 67-72.
32 Schuldt, K., Harmsringdahl, K., Activity levels during isometric test contractions of neck and shoulder muscles. Scand. J. Rehabil. Med. 1988; 20 (3): 117-127.
33 Riley, Z. A., Baudry, S., & Enoka, R. M. Reflex inhibition in human biceps brachii decreases with practice of a fatiguing contraction. Journal of neurophysiology. 2008; 100(5): 2843-51.
34 Soderberg GL, Knutson LM. A guide for use and interpretation of kinesiologic electromyographic data. Phys Ther. 2000;80(5):485-98.
35 Keenan, K.G., and Cuevas, F. J. V. Epoch length to accurately estimate the amplitude of interference EMG is likely the result of unavoidable amplitude cancellation. Biomed Signal Process Control. 2008 Apr; 3(2): 154–162.
36 Boogie Board. [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Jul 5]. Available from: https://www.myboogie
board.com/.
37 Benbow M. Principles and practice of teaching handwriting. In: Henderson A, Pehoski C, editors. Hand function in the child: foundations for remediation. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2006. p. 321–44.
38 Statt, N. "Here's why Apple made the stylus that Steve Jobs hated: Styluses and screens have come a long way". The Verge. Vox Media. Archived from the original on September 10, 2015.
39 Mann, A. M., Hinrichs, U., Quigley, A., Digital pen technology’s suitable to support handwriting leaning. The impact of pen and touch technology on education Hammond, Chapter 2. 2015: 7-17.
40 Arunesh C., Pankaj C., Surinder, D., and Rajender, K., Ergonomics in the Office Environment: A Review. Proceedings of international conference on energy and environment, March, 2009. 19-21.
41 Michael Y.C. L., Justin,G. Y., Jack,T. D. Evaluating the effect of four different pointing device designs on upper extremity posture and muscle activity during mousing tasks. Applied Ergonomics. 2015; 47: 259-264.
42 Hobday, S. "Keyboards designed to fit hand & reduce postural stress". Paper presented by S.W. Hobday at the ninth congress of the international ergonomic association, 2–6 September 1985, Bournemouth, England. PCD Maltron Ltd. (1985).
43 Hobday, S. "A Keyboard to Increase Productivity and Reduce Postural Stress". Paper presented at The Annual International Industrial Ergonomics and Safety Conference, June. 1988:8–10.
44 Hobday, Stephen (4 May 1994). "A Keyboard to Eliminate the Stress and the Pain". Computer Related Upper Limb Disorder. Paper presented to the 19th Annual Congress of IMART 4th May 1994.
45 Rempel, D. "The Split Keyboard: An Ergonomics Success Story". Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. 2008; 50 (3): 385–392.
46 Callegari, B., Maniglia, M. Hand rest
and wrist support are effective in preventing
fatigue during prolonged typing. Journal of
Hand Therapy. 2018; 31: 42-51.
47 Nag, P.K, Pal, S., Nag, A., Vyas, H.
Influence of arm and wrist support on
forearm and back muscle activity in computer
keyboard operation. Appl Erg. 2009;
40(2):86-291.
48 Jensen, C., Finsen, L., Sogaard, K., Christensen, H. Musculoskeletal symptoms and duration of computer and mouse use. Int. J. Indus. Ergonom. 2002; 30 (45): 265-275.
49 Armstrong, T.J. Foulke, J.A. Martin, B.J. Gerson, J. Rempel, D.M. Investigation of applied forces in alphanumeric keyboard work. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1994; 55 (1):30–35.
50 Estibaliz, A.M., Candida, D.C., Jose, I. N., Inmaculada, M.J., Manuel, F. R.O. A comparative Study of Handwriting and Computer Typing in Note-taking by University Students. Media Education Research Journal. 2016; 48 (14): 99-107.
2 Maiorana, C. Sgarbossa, L. and Salomoni, V. New methodologies in teaching e-structural mechanics using WWW, Comput Appl Eng Educ. 2008; 16, 189-210.
3 Ravindra, S., Hoffmann, E.R., Luximon, A. Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance. Applied Ergonomics. 2009; 40(2): 292-301.
4 Kim, J.H., et al. Differences in typing forces, muscle activity, comfort, and typing performances among virtual, notebook, and desktop keyboards. Applied Ergonomics. 2014 (45): 1406-1413.
5 Zabramski S, Neelakannan S. Paper equal screen; A comparison of a pen-based figural creativity test in computerized and paper form. Proceeding DESIRE '11 Proceedings of the Second Conference on Creativity and Innovation in Design. 2011: 47-50.
6 Huff, K. C. The comparison of mobile devices to computers for web-based assessments. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 49, 208-212.
7 Dualde, B.J.V., Buendia, F., Lemus, L., Cano, J.-C., Gutierrez Cuba, J., Lopez-Malo, A., et al. Redesigning engineering courses by introducing digital ink technology. Paper presented at the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference FIE, October 23-26, 2013, Oklahoma, USA.
8 Kowalski S.E. Kowlski F.V. Gardner T.Q. Lessons Learned When Gathering Real-Time Formative Assessment in the University Classroom Using Tablet PCs. Frontiers in Education Conference, 2009. FIE '09. 39th IEEE, 18-21 Oct. 1-5.
9 Isabwe GM et al. Using Assessment for Learning Mathematics with Mobile Tablet Based Solutions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2014; 9 (2): 29-36.
10 Annett, M., Anderson, F., Bischof, W.F., Gupta, A. The Pen is Mightier: Understanding Stylus Behaviour While inking on tablets. Proceeding of Graphics Interface Conference 2014, 7-9 May, Canadian Information Processing Society Toronto, Ont., Canada, 193-200.
11 Mogey N. Typing compared with handwriting for essay examination at university: letting the students choose. ALT-J. Research in Learning Technology. 2010; 18(1): 29-47.
12 Moge N. Students’ choices between typing and handwriting in examination. Active learning in higher education. 2012; 13(2): 117-128.
13 ANSI/HFES100-2007 Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Santa Monica, CA, USA. 2007.
14 Gerard, M.J. Armstrong, T.J. Franzblau, A. Martin, B.J. Rempel, D.M.. The effects of key switch stiffness on typing force, finger electromyography, and subjective discomfort. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1999; 60 (6): 762–769.
15 Gerard, M.J., Armstrong, T.J., Martin, B.J., Rempel, D.M. The effects of work pace on intra-subject and inter-subject keying force, electromyography, and fatigue. Hum. Factors, in press. 2001.
16 Pereira, A., Hsieh, C.-M., Laroche, C., Rempel, D. The effect of keyboard key spacing on typing speed, error, usability, and biomechanics, part 2: vertical spacing. Hum. Fact. J. Hum. Fact. Ergonom. Soc. 2013; 56(4):752-759.
17 Perry, R. "How products are made". Ballpoint pen. High Beam Research, Inc. 1998.
18 Sassoon R. The art and science of handwriting. Oxford: Intellect; 2004.
19 Goonetilleke RS, Hoffmann ER, Luximon A. Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance. Appl Ergon 2009;40(2):292–301.
20 International Organization for Standardization. Ergonomics of human—system interaction: Part 410. Design criteria for physical input devices (Reference No. ISO9241-410: 2008). Geneva, Switzerland: Author 2008.
21 Almeida, P.H., Cruz D.M., Magna L.A., Ferrigno I.S. An electromyographic analysis of two handwriting grasp patterns. J. lectromyogr Kinesiol. 2013; 23(4):838-43.
22 Leonard JH, Kok KS, Ayiesha R, et al. Prolonged writing task: comparison of
electromyographic analysis of upper trapezius muscle in subjects with or without neck pain. Clin Ther 2010;161(1):29–33.
23 Steinhart, N. S., Leurer, K.M., Analysis of proximal and distal muscle activity during handwriting tasks. Am J Occup Ther 2007;61(4):392–8.
24 Basmajian, J.V., De Luca, C.J. (1985). Muscles Alive: Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography. Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore.
25 Perotto, A., Delagi, E.F. Anatomical Guide for the Electromyographer: the Limbs and Trunk. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill., USA. 1994.
26 Jensen, C., Vasseljen, O., Westgaard, R.H., The influence of electrode position on bipolar surface electromyogram recordings of the upper trapezius muscle. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 1993;67 (3): 266-273.
27 Criswell, E., Cram’s introduction to Surface Electromyography. 2nded.: United States of America 2011.
28 Hermens H, Freriks B, Merletti R, Stegeman D, Blok J, Rau G. European recommendations for surface electromyography – SENIAM 8. Enschede: Roessing Research and Development B.V. 1999.
29 Peter, K. The ABC of EMG-A Practical Introduction to Kinesiological Electromyography. Noraxon INC. USA. 2005.
30 Jonsson, B. Measurement and evaluation of local muscular strain in the shoulder during contained work. J. Hum. Ergol. 1982; 11 (1): 73-88.
31 HarmsRingdahl, K., Ekholm, J., Schuldt, K., Linder, J., Ericson, M.O., Assessment of jet pilots’ upper trapezius load calibrated to maximal voluntary contraction and a standardized load. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol 1996;6 (1): 67-72.
32 Schuldt, K., Harmsringdahl, K., Activity levels during isometric test contractions of neck and shoulder muscles. Scand. J. Rehabil. Med. 1988; 20 (3): 117-127.
33 Riley, Z. A., Baudry, S., & Enoka, R. M. Reflex inhibition in human biceps brachii decreases with practice of a fatiguing contraction. Journal of neurophysiology. 2008; 100(5): 2843-51.
34 Soderberg GL, Knutson LM. A guide for use and interpretation of kinesiologic electromyographic data. Phys Ther. 2000;80(5):485-98.
35 Keenan, K.G., and Cuevas, F. J. V. Epoch length to accurately estimate the amplitude of interference EMG is likely the result of unavoidable amplitude cancellation. Biomed Signal Process Control. 2008 Apr; 3(2): 154–162.
36 Boogie Board. [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Jul 5]. Available from: https://www.myboogie
board.com/.
37 Benbow M. Principles and practice of teaching handwriting. In: Henderson A, Pehoski C, editors. Hand function in the child: foundations for remediation. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2006. p. 321–44.
38 Statt, N. "Here's why Apple made the stylus that Steve Jobs hated: Styluses and screens have come a long way". The Verge. Vox Media. Archived from the original on September 10, 2015.
39 Mann, A. M., Hinrichs, U., Quigley, A., Digital pen technology’s suitable to support handwriting leaning. The impact of pen and touch technology on education Hammond, Chapter 2. 2015: 7-17.
40 Arunesh C., Pankaj C., Surinder, D., and Rajender, K., Ergonomics in the Office Environment: A Review. Proceedings of international conference on energy and environment, March, 2009. 19-21.
41 Michael Y.C. L., Justin,G. Y., Jack,T. D. Evaluating the effect of four different pointing device designs on upper extremity posture and muscle activity during mousing tasks. Applied Ergonomics. 2015; 47: 259-264.
42 Hobday, S. "Keyboards designed to fit hand & reduce postural stress". Paper presented by S.W. Hobday at the ninth congress of the international ergonomic association, 2–6 September 1985, Bournemouth, England. PCD Maltron Ltd. (1985).
43 Hobday, S. "A Keyboard to Increase Productivity and Reduce Postural Stress". Paper presented at The Annual International Industrial Ergonomics and Safety Conference, June. 1988:8–10.
44 Hobday, Stephen (4 May 1994). "A Keyboard to Eliminate the Stress and the Pain". Computer Related Upper Limb Disorder. Paper presented to the 19th Annual Congress of IMART 4th May 1994.
45 Rempel, D. "The Split Keyboard: An Ergonomics Success Story". Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. 2008; 50 (3): 385–392.
46 Callegari, B., Maniglia, M. Hand rest
and wrist support are effective in preventing
fatigue during prolonged typing. Journal of
Hand Therapy. 2018; 31: 42-51.
47 Nag, P.K, Pal, S., Nag, A., Vyas, H.
Influence of arm and wrist support on
forearm and back muscle activity in computer
keyboard operation. Appl Erg. 2009;
40(2):86-291.
48 Jensen, C., Finsen, L., Sogaard, K., Christensen, H. Musculoskeletal symptoms and duration of computer and mouse use. Int. J. Indus. Ergonom. 2002; 30 (45): 265-275.
49 Armstrong, T.J. Foulke, J.A. Martin, B.J. Gerson, J. Rempel, D.M. Investigation of applied forces in alphanumeric keyboard work. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1994; 55 (1):30–35.
50 Estibaliz, A.M., Candida, D.C., Jose, I. N., Inmaculada, M.J., Manuel, F. R.O. A comparative Study of Handwriting and Computer Typing in Note-taking by University Students. Media Education Research Journal. 2016; 48 (14): 99-107.