Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 237–247 | Cite as

Measuring the role of age in user performance during interaction with computers

  • Beatriz Pariente-Martinez
  • Martin Gonzalez-Rodriguez
  • Daniel Fernandez-Lanvin
  • Javier De Andres-Suarez
Long paper


The influence of aging on computer interaction has been widely analyzed in human–computer interaction research literature. Despite this, there are no age-based user maps that could support the user-interface customization. Studying the specific needs and constraints of these groups is crucial in order to adapt a user interface to the user’s interaction requirements. This work studies the performance of a sample of participants on three different basic tasks (pointing, dragging and dropping, and text selection) and the influence of age for each of them. It is concluded that this influence differs between specific activities. A group profile map that can support automatic classification in the future has been obtained.


Personalization User categorization User performance HCI GOMS Fitts’s law Hick’s law 



This work has been funded by the Department of Science and Technology (Spain) under the National Program for Research, Development and Innovation: project TIN2011-25978, entitled Obtaining Adaptable, Robust and Efficient Software by Including Structural Reflection to Statically Typed Programming Languages, and project TIN2009-12132, entitled SHUBAI: Augmented Accessibility for Handicapped Users in Ambient Intelligence and in Urban Computing Environments.


  1. 1.
    Frøkjær, E., Hertzum, M., Hornbæk, K.: Measuring usability: are effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction really correlated? In: ACM CHI 2000 conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 345–352 (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agudo, J.E., Sánchez, H., Rico, M.: Playing games on the screen: adapting mouse interaction at early ages. In: 2010 10th IEEE international conference on advance learning technology, pp. 493–497 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donker, A., Reitsma, P.: Aiming and clicking in young children’s use of the computer mouse. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23, 2863–2874 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Donker, A., Reitsma, P.: Young children’s ability to use a computer mouse. Comput. Educ. 48, 602–617 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Inkpen, K.M.: Drag-and-drop versus point-and-click mouse interaction styles for children. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact. 8, 1–33 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaparro, A., Bohan, M., Fernandez, J., Choi, S.D., Kattel, B.: The impact of age on computer input device use: psychophysical and physiological measures. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 24, 503–513 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dickinson, A., Arnott, J., Prior, S.: Methods for human–computer interaction research with older people. Behav. Inf. Technol. 26, 343–352 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gregor, P., Newell, A.F., Zajicek, M.: Designing for dynamic diversity—interfaces for older people. In: Proceedings of the fifth international ACM conference on assistive technologies, pp. 151–156. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Slegers, K., van Boxtel, M.P.J., Jolles, J.: Computer use in older adults: determinants and the relationship with cognitive change over a 6 year episode. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28, 1–10 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, J.: Mouse movements of motion-impaired users: a submovement analysis. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computer Access. ASSETS’04, p. 102 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keates, S., Hwang, F., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P.J., Robinson, P.: Cursor measures for motion-impaired computer users. In: Proceedings of fifth international ACM conference assistive technology—Assets’02, p. 135 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hurst, A., Mankoff, J., Hudson, S.E.: Understanding pointing problems in real world computing environments. In: Proceedings of 10th international ACM SIGACCESS conference computer access. Assets’08, p. 43 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strom, P.S., Strom, R.D., Wingate, J.J., Kraska, M.F., Beckert, T.E.: Cyberbullying: assessment of student experience for continuous improvement planning. NASSP Bull. 96, 137–153 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill, R., Dickinson, A., Arnott, J., Gregor, P., Mciver, L.: Older web users’ eye movements: experience counts. In: CHI’11 proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. pp. 1151–1160. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.A., Charness, N., Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J.: Designing for older adults: principles and creative human factors approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hargittai, E., Hinnant, A.: Differences in young adults’ use of the internet. Commun. Res. 35, 602–621 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fox, S., Madden, M.: Generations Online.
  18. 18.
    Cheong, Y., Shehab, R.L., Ling, C.: Effects of age and psychomotor ability on kinematics of mouse-mediated aiming movement. Ergonomics 56, 1006–1020 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loos, E.: In search of information on websites: a question of age? University access human–computer interact. Users Divers. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 6766, 196–204 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newel, A.: The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems. Commun. ACM 23, 396–410 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schrepp, M.: GOMS analysis as a tool to investigate the usability of web units for disabled users. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 9, 77–86 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xiang, L.X.L., Xiaoli, C.X.C.: The research on performance of automobile human-machine interface based on BHR-GOMS behavior model. In: Intelligent computer intelligent systems (ICIS), 2010 IEEE international Conference 2 (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oyewole, S.A., Haight, J.M.: Determination of optimal paths to task goals using expert system based on GOMS model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27, 823–833 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abdulin, E.: Using the keystroke-level model for designing user interface on middle-sized touch screens. In: Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 673–686. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Phillips, J.G., Triggs, T.J.: Characteristics of cursor trajectories controlled by the computer mouse. Ergonomics 44, 527–536 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guiard, Y., Olafsdottir, H.B., Perrault, S.T.: Fitt’s law as an explicit time/error trade-off. In: Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’11, p. 1619. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salthouse, T.A.: Effects of age and skill in typing. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 113, 345–371 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schneider, D.W., Anderson, J.R.: A memory-based model of Hick’s law. Cogn. Psychol. 62, 193–222 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Crook, C.: Young children’s skill in using a mouse to control a graphical computer interface. Comput. Educ. 19, 199–207 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Phillips, J.G., Triggs, T.J., Meehan, J.W.: Cursor orientation and computer screen positioning movements. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 43, 435–441 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Whisenand, T.G., Emurian, H.H.: Analysis of cursor movements with a mouse. Comput. Hum. Behav. 15, 85–103 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tränkle, U., Deutschmann, D.: Factors influencing speed and precision of cursor positioning using a mouse. Ergonomics 34, 161–174 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mackenzie, I.S., Buxton, W.: A comparison of input devices in element pointing and dragging tasks. In: CHI’91 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 161–166. ACM, New York, NY, USA (1991)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Joiner, R., Messer, D., Light, P., Littleton, K.: It is best to point for young children: a comparison of children’s pointing and dragging. Comput. Hum. Behav. 14, 513–529 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Schmidt, A., Porter, L., Specht, J., Gilbert, J.: Assessing the use of input devices for teachers and children in early childhood education programs. Inf. Technol. Child. Educ. Annu. 2004, 261–280 (2004)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kuhtz-Buschbeck, J.P., Stolze, H., Jöhnk, K., Boczek-Funcke, A., Illert, M.: Development of prehension movements in children: a kinematic study. Exp. Brain Res. 122, 424–432 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stubbs, N.B., Fernandez, J.E., Glenn, W.M.: Normative data on joint ranges of motion of 25- to 54-year-old males. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 12, 265–272 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Walker, N., Philbin, D.A., Fisk, A.D.: Age-related differences in movement control: adjusting submovement structure to optimize performance. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 52, P40–P52 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Metter, E.J., Conwit, R., Tobin, J., Fozard, J.L.: Age-associated loss of power and strength in the upper extremities in women and men. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 52A, B267–B276 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wagman, I.H., Lesse, H.: Maximum conduction velocities of motor fibers of ulnar nerve in human subjects of various ages and sizes. J. Neurophysiol. 15, 235–244 (1952)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fozard, J.L., Vercryssen, M., Reynolds, S.L., Hancock, P.A., Quilter, R.E.: Age differences and changes in reaction time: the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. J. Gerontol. 49, P179–P189 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Spirduso, W.W.: Physical fitness, aging, and psychomotor speed: a review. J. Gerontol. 35, 850–865 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rikli, R., Busch, S.: Motor performance of women as a function of age and physical activity level. J. Gerontol. 41, 645–649 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kallman, D.A., Plato, C.C., Tobin, J.D.: The role of muscle loss in the age-related decline of grip strength: cross-sectional and longitudinal perspectives. J. Gerontol. 45, M82–M88 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Chadwick-Dias, A., McNulty, M., Tullis, T.: Web usability and age. ACM SIGCAPH Comput. Phys. Handicap. 7374, 30–37 (2002)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Czaja, S.J., Lee, C.C.: The impact of aging on access to technology. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 5, 341–349 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Walker, N., Millians, J., Worden, A.: Mouse accelerations and performance of older computer users. In: Proceedings of human factors Ergon Society Annual Meeting. 40, 151–154 (1996)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tullis, T.S.: Older adults and the web: lessons learned from eye-tracking. In: UAHCI’07 proceedings of the 4th international conference on Universal access in human computer interaction: coping with diversity, pp. 1030–1039. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Xie, B.: Older adults, computers, and the internet: future directions. Gerontechnology 2, 289–305 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Morrell, R.W.: Older Adults, Health Information, and the World Wide Web. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nap, H.H., De Greef, H.P., Bouwhuis, D.G.: Access for all by cognitive engineering. Gerontechnology 3, 258 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Freudenthal, D.: Age differences in the performance of information retrieval tasks. Behav. Inf. Technol. 20, 9–22 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sayers, H.: Desktop virtual environments: a study of navigation and age. Interact. Comput. 16, 939–956 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Neerincx, M.A., Lindenberg, J., Rypkema, J.A., van Besouw, N.J.P.: A practical cognitive theory of web-navigation: explaining age-related performance differences. In: Position paper. Workshop basic research symposium CHI2000. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ramprasath, L., Singh, K.: Statistical options: crash resistant financial contracts based on robust estimation. Stat. Probab. Lett. 77, 196–203 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wu, M., Zuo, Y.: Trimmed and Winsorized means based on a scaled deviation. J. Stat. Plan. Inference. 139, 350–365 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beatriz Pariente-Martinez
    • 1
  • Martin Gonzalez-Rodriguez
    • 1
  • Daniel Fernandez-Lanvin
    • 1
  • Javier De Andres-Suarez
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OviedoOviedoSpain
  2. 2.Department of AccountingUniversity of OviedoOviedoSpain

Personalised recommendations