Advertisement

Older Adults’ Number Entry Using Touchscreen and Keyboard-Mouse Computers

  • Zaidatol Haslinda Abdullah SaniEmail author
  • Helen Petrie
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11870)

Abstract

Touchscreen computers are a rapidly growing sector of the personal computer market and seem to be particularly suitable for older users. However, research has highlighted usability problems with the interaction techniques deployed on these devices for older users. A study was conducted with 12 older users of number entry tasks on a tablet and a PC, comparing three interaction techniques: keypad, plus/minus buttons and number selector (picker on the tablet, pull down menu on the PC). There were no differences in time to enter numbers between the devices, but buttons were fastest and number selectors slowest. Mental workload was also significantly higher with number selectors compared to either buttons or keypad. Older users had a complex pattern of preferences, but overall favoured the keypad for number entry and disliked the picker.

Keywords

Interaction technique Older adults Number entry Input devices Tablet computer Desktop computer 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was part of the first author’s PhD research programme. We would like to thank all our participants for their time and effort to take part in the study. The first author would like to acknowledge funding support from Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA). A special thank you to Universiti Malaysia Sabah, the first author’s current workplace, for providing the funding to attend the 6th International Visual Informatics Conference.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Pew Research Center, Technology Use Among Seniors. http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Research New Zealand: A Report on a Survey of New Zealanders’ Use of Smartphones and other Mobile Communication Devices (2015). http://www.researchnz.com/pdf/Special%20Reports/Research%20New%20Zealand%20Special%20Report%20-%20Use%20of%20Smartphones.pdf
  6. 6.
    Barnard, Y., Bradley, M.D., Hodgson, F., Lloyd, A.D.: Learning to use new technologies by older adults: perceived difficulties, experimentation behaviour and usability. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(4), 1715–1724 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Culén, A.L., Bratteteig, T.: Touch-screens and elderly users: a perfect match. Changes 7, 15 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jayroe, T.J., Wolfram, D.: Internet searching, tablet technology and older adults. Proc. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 49(1), 1–3 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quan-Haase, A., Martin, K., Schreurs, K.: Interviews with digital seniors: ICT use in the context of everyday life. Inform. Commun. Soc. 19(5), 691–707 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tsai, H.Y.S., Shillair, R., Cotten, S.R., Winstead, V., Yost, E.: Getting grandma online: are tablets the answer for increasing digital inclusion for older adults in the US? Educ. Gerontol. 41(10), 695–709 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Werner, F., Werner, K., Oberzaucher, J.: Tablets for seniors – an evaluation of a current model (iPad). In: Wichert, R., Eberhardt, B. (eds.) Ambient Assisted Living. ATSC, pp. 177–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27491-6_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wright, P.: Digital tablet issues for older adults’. Gerontechnology 13(2), 306 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J., Nair, S., Rubert, M.: Understanding sources of user variability in computer-based data entry performance. Behav. Inform. Technol. 17(5), 282–293 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Czaja, S.J., Guerrier, J.H., Nair, S.N., Landauer, T.K.: Computer communication as an aid to independence for older adults’. Behav. Inform. Technol. 12(4), 197–207 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siek, K.A., Rogers, Y., Connelly, K.H.: Fat finger worries: how older and younger users physically interact with PDAs. In: Costabile, M.F., Paternò, F. (eds.) INTERACT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3585, pp. 267–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11555261_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith, M.W., Sharit, J., Czaja, S.J.: Aging, motor control, and the performance of computer mouse tasks. Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 41(3), 389–396 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hourcade, J.P., Nguyen, C.M., Perry, K.B., Denburg, N.L.: Pointassist for older adults: analyzing sub-movement characteristics to aid in pointing tasks. In: Proceeding of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1115–1124(2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moffatt, K., McGrenere, J.: Steadied-bubbles: combining techniques to address pen-based pointing errors for younger and older adults’. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1125–1134 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wacharamanotham, C., Hurtmanns, J., Mertens, A., Kronenbuerger, M., Schlick, C., Borchers, J.: Evaluating swabbing: a touchscreen input method for elderly users with tremor. In: Proceeding of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 623–626 (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chung, M.K., Kim, D., Na, S., Lee, D.: Usability evaluation of numeric entry tasks on keypad type and age. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 40(1), 97–105 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Findlater, L., Froehlich, J.E., Fattal, K., Wobbrock, J.O., Dastyar, T.: Age-related differences in performance with touchscreens compared to traditional mouse input. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 343–346 (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jochems, N., Vetter, S., Schlick, C.: A comparative study of information input devices for aging computer users. Behav. Inform. Technol. 32(9), 902–919 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kobayashi, M., Hiyama, A., Miura, T., Asakawa, C., Hirose, M., Ifukube, T.: Elderly user evaluation of mobile touchscreen interactions. In: Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6946, pp. 83–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23774-4_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Piper, A.M., Campbell, R., Hollan, J.D.: Exploring the accessibility and appeal of surface computing for older adult health care support. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 907–916 (2010Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Snodgrass, J.G., Levy-Berger, G., Haydon, M.: Human experimental Psychology, vol. 395. Oxford University Press, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Rushing, A., Bechtel, L., Gilbert, J.: Use of computer input devices by older adults. J. Appl. Gerontol. 24(5), 419–438 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rau, P.L.P., Hsu, J.W.: Interaction devices and web design for novice older users. Educ. Gerontol. 31(1), 19–40 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhou, J., Rau, P.L.P., Salvendy, G.: Older adults’ text entry on smart phones and tablets: investigating effects of display size and input method on acceptance and performance. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 30(9), 727–739 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stößel, C., Blessing, L.: Mobile device interaction gestures for older users. In: Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries, pp. 793–796 (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv. Psychol. 52, 139–183 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Howell, D.C.: Statistical Methods for Psychology. Cengage Learning, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Snijders, T.A., Bosker, R.: Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Applied Multilevel Analysis. Sage, London (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cabreira, A.T., Hwang, F.: Evaluating the effects of feedback type on older adults’ performance in mid-air pointing and target selection. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, pp. 111–119. ACM (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zaidatol Haslinda Abdullah Sani
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Helen Petrie
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Computing and InformaticsUniversiti Malaysia SabahKota KinabaluMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations