skip to main content
10.1145/2414536.2414633acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesozchiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Actively engaging older adults in the development and evaluation of tablet technology

Published:26 November 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we describe a multi-faceted approach for engaging older adults in the design and evaluation of a tablet application. Our approach consisted of five key elements: 1) involving care providers in the research, 2) conducting social events, 3) supporting use of the technology through scaffolding, 4) providing multiple channels of communication between participants and researchers, and 5) progressively revealing the technology functions. We explored this approach with seven participants (aged 71-92) who used a prototype iPad application to engage in peer-to-peer communication. We found that each of the five elements contributed to successfully engaging older people in the development and evaluation process. This paper provides insights into suitable approaches for designing technologies with older users, illustrating the importance of creating a supportive environment and employing strategies that help to build participants' confidence, both in using the technology and in participating in the design and evaluation process.

References

  1. Blythe, M. A., Monk, A. F., & Doughty, K. Socially dependable design: The challenge of ageing populations for HCI. Interacting with Computers, 17, 6 (2005), 672--689. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Coleman, G. W., Gibson, L., Hanson, V. L., Bobrowicz, A., & McKay, A. Engaging the disengaged: How do we design technology for digitally excluded older adults?. In Proc. DIS 2010, ACM Press (2010), 175--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. David, J., Benjamin, W., Baecker, R., Gromala, D., & Birnholtz, J. Living with pain, staying in touch: Exploring the communication needs of older adults with chronic pain. Ext. Abstracts CHI 2011, ACM Press (2011), 1219--1224. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Dewsbury, G., Rouncefield, M., Sommerville, I., Onditi, V., & Bagnall, P. Designing technology with older people. Universal Access in the Information Society, 6 (2007), 207--217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Doyle, J., Skrba, Z., McDonnell, R., & Arent, B. (2010). Designing a touch screen communication device to support social interaction amongst older adults. In Proc. BCS Interaction Specialist Group, British Computer Society (2010), 177--185). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Edlin-White, R., Cobb, S., Floyde, A., Lewthwaite, S., Wang, J., & Riedel, J. From guinea pigs to design partners: Working with older people in ICT design. In P. Langdon, J. Clarkson, P. Robinson, J. Lazar & A. Heylighen (Eds.), Designing Inclusive Systems. Springer-Verlag (2012), 155--164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Eisma, R., Dickinson, A., Goodman, J., Mival, O., Syme, A., & Tiwari, L. Mutual inspiration in the development of new technology for older people. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Inclusive Design and Communications (2003).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Garattini, C., Wherton, J., & Prendergast, D. Linking the lonely: an exploration of a communication technology designed to support social interaction among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society, 11, 2 (2012), 211--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Gaver, W., Boucher, A., Bowers, J., Blythe, M., Jarvis, N., Cameron, D., et al. The Photostroller: Supporting diverse care home residents in engaging with the world. In Proc. CHI 2011, ACM Press (2011), 1757--1766. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hanson, V. L. Influencing technology adoption by older adults. Interacting with Computers 22 (2010), 502--509. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B. B., Druin, A., Plaisant, C., et al. Technology probes: Inspiring design for and with families. In Proc. CHI 2003, ACM Press (2003), 17--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Karahasanovic, A., Brandtzaeg, P. B., Heim, J., Luders, M., Vermeir, L., Pierson, J., et al. Co-creation and user-generated content - elderly people's user requirements. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25 (2009), 655--678. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Lindley, S. E., Harper, R., & Sellen, A. Designing for elders: Exploring the complexity of relationships in later life. In Proc. 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conf. on People and Computers, British Computer Society (2008), 77--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Lindsay, S., Jackson, D., Schofield, G., & Olivier, P. Engaging older people using participatory design. In Proc. CHI 2012, ACM Press (2012), 1199--1208. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Massimi, M., Baecker, R., & Wu, M. Using participatory activities with seniors to critique, build, and evaluate mobile phones In Proc. ASSETS 2007 (2007), 155--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. McLaughlin, A. C., Rogers, W. A., & Fisk, A. D. (2009). Using direct and indirect input devices: Attention demands and age-related differences. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 16, 1 (2009), 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Pedell, S., Vetere, F. Kulik, L, Ozanne, E., and Gruner, A. Social isolation of older people: the role of domestic technologies. In Proc. OZCHI 2010. Brisbane, Australia, ACM Press (2010), 167--170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Stößel, C., Wandke, H., & Blessing, L. Gestural Interfaces for Elderly Users: Help or Hindrance? In Gesture in Embodied Communication and Human-Computer Interaction (2010), 269--280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Vetere, F., Davis, H., Gibbs, M., & Howard, S. The Magic Box and Collage: Responding to the challenge of distributed intergenerational play. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 67, 2 (2009), 165--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Vines, J., Blythe, M., Lindsay, S., Dunphy, P., Monk, A., & Olivier, P. Questionable concepts: Critique as a resource for designing with eighty somethings. In Proc. CHI 2012, ACM Press (2012), 1169--1178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Actively engaging older adults in the development and evaluation of tablet technology

        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 Other conferences
          OzCHI '12: Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference
          November 2012
          692 pages

          Copyright © 2012 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 26 November 2012

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate362of729submissions,50%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader