Author Topic: Ergonomics and productivity science in keyboards  (Read 5798 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nanienn

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1
Ergonomics and productivity science in keyboards
« on: Sat, 27 March 2021, 18:32:26 »
Do you have any compilation of scientific studies on ergonomics and typing performance on keyboard types? Is one better than another?

I found this articles, but seemingly don't say nothing about typing performance in a long term
- https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/128980692.pdf
- https://kristiania.brage.unit.no/kristiania-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2663670/Journal%20article-dividedKeyboard-R1V07.pdf?sequence=4
- https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article/81/4/1038/2829527

I have a slight obsession with looking for the best of something, demonstrated with evidence, and I know many of you must have it too.

Offline vvp

  • Posts: 858
Re: Ergonomics and productivity science in keyboards
« Reply #1 on: Sun, 28 March 2021, 13:55:17 »
Well, most people on this forum agree that column staggered split keyboards with significant tenting angle are best for ergonomics. That is also indicated by the last of the 3 studies you posted. So overall keyboard shape is the most significant factor for ergonomics (so that hands are in a natural position).

Speed will depend especially on the distance travelled by fingers. That means that chording totally wins. Then it will depend mostly on the layout (e.g. dvorak versus qwerty versus many other less know layouts). The least significant will be the keyboard shape itself.

There was a link to a study in this forum about slope and tenting (opening angle):
https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=98277.msg2682219#msg2682219