Advertisement

User Survey

  • Pradipta Biswas
Chapter
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)

Abstract

Human–computer interaction (HCI) is about knowing the user, which becomes more important while we consider users with different range of abilities in a developing country. This chapter reports a survey to estimate Indian elderly and disabled users’ perceptual, cognitive, and motor capabilities, and also their experience and attitude towards technology. We have initially identified functional parameters that can affect users’ interaction with electronic devices, and combined both objective metric on functional parameters and subjective attitude toward technology. Previous surveys either concentrated on ergonomics or demographic details of users in European countries or focused on a particular device like digital TV or mobile phones. There is not much reported work on capabilities and attitude towards technology of an older Indian population, especially from an HCI point of view .

Keywords

European Union Mobile Phone Grip Strength Indian Population Elderly User 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Angst, F., et al. (2010). Prediction of grip and key pinch strength in 978 healthy subjects. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 11, 94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Army Individual Test Battery. (1944). Manual of directions and scoring. D.C. War Department, Adjuvant General’s Office: Washington.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biswas, P., & Langdon, P. (2012) Developing multimodal adaptation algorithm for mobility impaired users by evaluating their hand strength. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(9), 576–596, (Taylor & Francis, Print ISSN: 1044-7318).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biswas P., & Robinson P. (2009) Predicting pointing time from hand strength, usability & HCI for e-Inclusion, 5th symposium of the Austrian computer society (USAB 2009). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biswas, P., Joshi, R., Chattopadhyay, S., Acharya, U. R., & Lim, T. (2013) Interaction techniques for users with severe motor-impairment. . P. Biswas, C. Duarte, P. Langdon, L. Alameda, & C. Jung (Eds.), (A multimodal end-2-end approach to accessible c omputing (pp. 119–135). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biswas, P., & Robinson, P., & Langdon P. (2012) Designing inclusive interfaces through user modelling and simulation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(1), 1–33, (Taylor & Francis, Print ISSN: 1044-7318).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Colour Blindness Test (2008). http://www.kcl.ac.uk/teares/gktvc/vc/lt/colourblindness/cblind.htm. Accessed 12 Aug2008.
  8. 8.
    Dalstra, J. A. A., Kunst, A. E., Borrell, C., Breeze, E., Cambois, E., Costa, G., et al. (2005). Socioeconomic differences in the prevalence of common chronic diseases: An overview of eight European countries. International Journal of Epidemiology, 34 (2), 316–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    GUIDE D7.1. (2013) Initial user study. http://www.guide-project.eu/includes/requestFile.php?id=129&pub=2. Accessed 18 June 2013.
  10. 10.
    ITU (2013) Making Mobile Phones and Services accessible for Persons with Disabilities. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/sis/PwDs/Documents/Mobile_Report.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2013.
  11. 11.
    ITU (2013) Making Television Accessible Report. G3ict-ITU, November 2011. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/sis/PwDs/Documents/Making_TV_Accessible-FINAL-WithAltTextInserted.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2013.
  12. 12.
    Kaplan, R. J. (2006). Physical medicine and rehabilitation review. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Langdon, P., & Thimbleby, H. (2010). Inclusion and interaction: Designing interaction for inclusive populations. Interacting with computers, V22 (pp. 439–448). Amsterdam: Elsevier (Editorial for special edition).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mackenbach, J. P., et al. (1997). Socioeconomic inequalities in morbidity and mortality in Western Europe. Lancet, 349(9066), 1655–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siegrist J., & Marmot M. (2004). Health inequalities and the psychosocial environment—two scientific challenges. Social Science & Medicine, 58(8), 1463–1473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations