---- datatemplateentry publication ---- template : publications:display_template title : Influence of Annotation Media on Proof-Reading Tasks date_date : 2023 template : publications:display_template authors_ : [[people:andreas_schmid|Andreas Schmid]], [[people:marie_sautmann|Marie Sautmann]], Vera Wittmann, Florian Kaindl, Philipp Schauhuber, Philipp Gottschalk, [[people:raphael_wimmer|Raphael Wimmer]] epub_url : https://epub.uni-regensburg.de/54701/1/3603555.3603572.pdf publisher_url : http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3603555.3603572 pdf_url : https://epub.uni-regensburg.de/54701/1/3603555.3603572.pdf bibtex_url : https://epub.uni-regensburg.de/cgi/export/eprint/54701/BibTeX/epub-eprint-54701.bib video_url : doi : 10.1145/3603555.3603572 photo_img : short-description : We present three user studies comparing different annotation media in the context of proof-reading tasks. abstract : Annotating and proof-reading documents are common tasks. Digital annotation tools provide easily searchable annotations and facilitate sharing documents and remote collaboration with others. On the other hand, advantages of paper, such as creative freedom and intuitive use, can get lost when annotating digitally. There is a large amount of research indicating that paper outperforms digital annotation tools in task time, error recall and task load. However, most research in this field is rather old and does not take into consideration increasing screen resolution and performance, as well as better input techniques in modern devices. We present three user studies comparing different annotation media in the context of proof-reading tasks. We found that annotating on paper is still faster and less stressful than with a PC or tablet computer, but the difference is significantly smaller with a state-of-the-art device. We did not find a difference in error recall, but the used medium has a strong influence on how users annotate. published-in : Proceedings of the Mensch und Computer 2023 project : ----