Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Learn what we’re going through”: attitudes of older powered chair users towards mixed reality games that involve power mobility

  • Long paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Older powered chair users’ perceptions on and attitudes towards mixed reality and modern facilitating technologies, such as tablets and smartphones, was explored to inform the design of mixed reality games that involve power mobility. Eleven older powered chair users (aged 55 and over) were interviewed in focus groups about their knowledge of, adoption of, experiences with, attitudes about, preferences for, and interest in these topics. Questionnaire and interview data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Findings suggest that community-dwelling older powered chair users are a technologically forward group that use or are interested in trying new technologies and interaction paradigms, with key barriers being identity mismatch, affordability, and social acceptability. Although they did not see their use of powered chairs, new technologies, and digital entertainment as an integrated system, participants were receptive to the idea of synchronizing assistive and non-assistive technologies for the purpose of social entertainment, advanced training, and/or promoting understanding and empathy in others. In particular, the concept of a game-based mixed reality platform designed around performance mastery for older powered chair users and empathy training for able-bodied friends and family members was well-received. Initial resistance due to identity mismatch or lack of knowledge was mitigated through explanation and examples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aarhus, R., et al.: Turning training into play: embodied gaming, seniors, physical training and motivation. Gerontechnology 10, 2 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allen, M.K.: Consumption of Culture by Older Canadians on the Internet. Statistics Canada, Ottawa (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brandt, A., et al.: Older people’s use of powered wheelchairs for activity and participation. J. Rehabil. Med. 36, 70–77 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Clarkson, J.: Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population. Springer, Great Britain (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Cresci, M.K., et al.: The digital divide and urban older adults. CIN Comput. Inf. Nurs. 28(2), 88–94 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dickerson, A.E., et al.: Transportation and aging: a research agenda for advancing safe mobility. Gerontologist. 47(5), 578–590 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Edey, J. et al.: Powered to play: a mixed reality game for people driving powered chairs. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Games, Entertainment, and Media Conference, pp. 1–8 IEEE, Toronto (2014)

  8. Evans, S., et al.: Older adults’ use of, and satisfaction with, electric powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs. Age Ageing 36(4), 431–435 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fomiatti, R. et al.: The experience of being a motorised mobility scooter user. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 9(3), 183–187 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gamberini, L. et al.: Eldergames project: an innovative mixed reality table-top solution to preserve cognitive functions in elderly people. In: 2nd Conference on Human System Interactions, 2009. HSI’09, pp. 164–169 (2009)

  11. Gerling, K.M. et al.: KINECTwheels: wheelchair-accessible motion-based game interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3055–3058 ACM, Paris, France (2013)

  12. Guest, G., et al.: Applied Thematic Analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Jung, Y. et al.: Games for a better life: effects of playing Wii games on the well-being of seniors in a long-term care facility. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment, pp. 5:1–5:6 ACM, New York, NY, USA (2009)

  14. Khoo, E.T., et al.: Age invaders: social and physical inter-generational mixed reality family entertainment. Virtual Real. 12(1), 3–16 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Korotchenko, A., Hurd Clarke, L.: Power mobility and the built environment: the experiences of older Canadians. Disabil. Soc. 29(3), 431–443 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Krueger, R.A., Casey, M.A.: Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. LaPlante, M.P.: Demographics of wheeled mobility device users. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Space Requirements for Wheeled Mobility. University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY (2003)

  18. Melenhorst, A.-S., et al.: Older adults’ motivated choice for technological innovation: evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psychol. Aging 21(1), 190–195 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Milgram, P., Kishino, F.: A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. E77-D(12), 1321–1329 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mitzner, T.L., et al.: Older adults talk technology: technology usage and attitudes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26(6), 1710–1721 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Montola, M.: A ludological view on the pervasive mixed-reality game research paradigm. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 15(1), 3–12 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Morris, M.G., Venkatesh, V.: Age differences in technology adoption decisions: implications for a changing work force. Pers. Psychol. 53(2), 375–403 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Collins, K.M.T.: A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. Qual. Rep. 12(2), 281–316 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Owsley, C.: Driving mobility, older adults, and quality of life. Gerontechnology. 1(4), 220–230 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Oxley, J., Whelan, M.: It cannot be all about safety: the benefits of prolonged mobility. Traffic Inj. Prev. 9(4), 367–378 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosso, A.L., et al.: Mobility, disability, and social engagement in older adults. J. Aging Health. 25(4), 617–637 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanford, J.A., et al.: Identifying inclusive design factors that contribute to community mobility and participation of older wheelchair users. Gerontechnology. 9(2), 246 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith, K.T.: Needs analysis: or, how do you capture, represent, and validate user requirements in a formal manner/notation before design. In: Karwowski, W., et al. (eds.) Human Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design: Methods and Techniques, pp. 415–428. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Steyn, P.V., Chan, A.S.: Mobility scooter research project. University of the Fraser Valley: Centre for Education and Research on Aging, British Columbia, Canada (2008)

  30. Tipping, J.: Focus groups: a method of needs assessment. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 18(3), 150–154 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Torkia, C. et al.: Power wheelchair driving challenges in the community: a users’ perspective. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 10(3), 211–215 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Veenhof, B., Timusk, P.: Online activities of Canadian boomers and seniors. Canadian Social Trends. Stat. Can. Cat. 11-008-X. http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/olc-cel/olc.action?objId=11-008-X200900210910&objType=47 (2009)

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Thanks to Joseph Moscatiello for his help with data analysis and reliability testing. Special thanks to Variety Village and Sherri Risto for helping with recruitment and providing space to run the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, 5 King’s College Road, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G8, Canada

    Katie Seaborn

  2. Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada

    Peter Pennefather

  3. Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada

    Deborah I. Fels

Authors
  1. Katie Seaborn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Pennefather
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Deborah I. Fels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katie Seaborn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seaborn, K., Pennefather, P. & Fels, D.I. “Learn what we’re going through”: attitudes of older powered chair users towards mixed reality games that involve power mobility. Univ Access Inf Soc 15, 699–711 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0450-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0450-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation