Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Prior experience in the use of domestic product interfaces

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

Abstract

Interaction design and usability has focussed on instantaneous interaction, but the effects of prior experience are evidently important. Extant theories debate the nature of mental models or knowledge structures and their content, but less emphasis has been given to the effects of the various contributors to “unconscious” prior experience and their interaction with capability during real-time use of products. As a first step towards understanding product learning for inclusive design, this paper examines the role of prior experience, age and cognitive capability in individuals’ performance with daily living products. Two microwave ovens were tested that had the same underlying functionality, but with the interface variations of dial or button control. The differences in performance were such that dials were found to be easier to use for both younger users and also those with higher cognitive ability. This was not related to prior experience as measured in a product knowledge questionnaire. However, it was possible that users possessed some degree of prior experience with specific interface elements and their use. Hence, in a second training-transfer experiment with DAB radios, participants were trained to a criterion of low error with a common base product to investigate the performance impact that subsequently resulted from switching to two further interfaces that varied in known interface properties. Transfer gave rise to a significant increase in time to complete set tasks proportional to the degree of difference. Small variations of interface function and appearance led to specific time-consuming misperceptions and trial-and-error exploration of interface functionality. Detailed error analysis further suggested the misapplication of specific sequences learnt with the original training. Both studies clearly indicate a general reduction of performance with increasing age and with reduced cognitive capability, but they also suggest that users were able to learn new interface sequences more effectively when they possessed higher cognitive capability. The results were not consistent with an interpretation in which knowledge-based mental models of the underlying functions of daily living products were dominating interaction effectiveness. They are, however, consistent with accounts of interaction that propose that in the absence of an adequate previously acquired mental model, users primarily resort to the application of skill-based or rule-based schemas to achieve task goals with everyday products (Freudenthal in Learning to use interactive devices: age differences in the reasoning process. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, 1998; Blackler in Intuitive interaction with complex artefacts. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 2006; Langdon et al. in Univers. Access Inf. Soc., 6(2): 179–191, 2007).

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vanderheiden, G.C., Vanderheiden, K.: Guidelines for the design of consumer products to increase their accessibility to people with disabilities—working draft 1.7, Trace R & D Center (1992)

  2. Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J.: Countering design exclusion–an introduction to inclusive design. Springer-Verlag, London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Persad, U., Langdon, P.M., Clarkson, P.J.: Inclusive design evaluation and the capability-demand relationship. In: Clarkson, P.J., Langdon, P.M., Robinson, P. (eds.) Designing accessible technology, 177–188 (2006) ISBN 13: 978-1-84628-364-2. Springer

  4. Nicolle, C., Abascal, J. (eds.): Inclusive design guidelines for HCI. Taylor and Francis, London (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Coleman, R.: Designing for our future selves. In: Preiser, W.F.E., Ostroff, E. (eds.) Universal design handbook, pp. 4.1–4.25. MacGraw-Hill, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Norman, D.A.: The design of everyday things. Basic Books, Doubleday/Currency, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Thimbleby, H.: Press on: Principles of interaction programming. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Langdon, P., Lewis, T., Clarkson, P.J.: The effects of prior experience on the use of consumer products. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 6(2), 179–191, Springer (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Blackler, A., Popovic, V., Mahar, D.: The nature of intuitive use of products: An experimental approach. Des. Stud. 24(6), 491–506 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lewis, T., Clarkson, P.J.: A user study into customising for inclusive design. In: Proceedings of include 2005. Royal College of Art, London (2005)

  11. Freudenthal, T.D.: Learning to use interactive devices: Age differences in the reasoning process. Eindhoven University of Technology, Ph.D. thesis (1998)

  12. Docampo Rama, R.M.: Technology generations handling complex user interfaces. Ph.D. Thesis, TU Eindhoven (2001). ISBN 90-386-0913-2

  13. Blackler, A.: Intuitive interaction with complex artefacts. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ryu, H., Monk, A.: Analysing interaction problems with cyclic interaction theory: Low-level interaction walkthrough. PsychNol J 2(3), 304–330 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reason, J.: Human error. Cambridge University Press, NY (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Endsley, M.R., Bolte, B., Jones, D.G.: Designing for situation awareness: An approach to user centred design. Taylor and Francis, London (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wickens, C.D., Hollands, J.G.: Engineering psychology and human performance, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2000). ISBN 321-04711

    Google Scholar 

  18. Freudenthal, A.: The design of home appliances for young and old consumers. Series ageing and ergonomics, part 2. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University Press, The Netherlands (1999). ISBN 90-407-1755-9

  19. Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Keates, S., Lebbon, C. (eds.): Inclusive design: Design for the whole population. Springer-Verlag, London (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. TRACE Center (1992) Accessible design of consumer products. Available online at http://trace.wisc.edu. Accessed November 2009

  21. Dong, H., Keates, S., Clarkson, P.J.: Industry perceptions to inclusive design. In: Proceedings of design engineering technical conference, Utah (2004)

  22. WHO: ICF international classification of functioning, disability and health. World Health Organization, Geneva (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rabbitt, P.M.A.: Does it all go together when it goes? The Nineteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Q J Exp Psychol 46A(3), 385–434 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Baddeley, A.D.: The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends Cogn Sci. 4(11) Elsevier (2000)

  25. Sudjianto, A., Otto, K.: Modularization to support multiple brand platforms. In: Proceedings of design engineering technical conference, Pittsburgh (2001)

  26. Lintern, G., Roscoe, S.N., Sivier, J.: Display principles, control dynamics, and environmental factors in pilot performance and transfer of training. Hum. Factors 32, 299–317 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Carroll, J.M., Carrithers, C.: Blocking learner error states in a training wheels system. Hum. Factors 26(4), 377–389 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rasmussen, J.: Information processing and human–machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering, vol. 12. North-Holland Series in System Science and Engineering, NY (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schaie, K.W.: Variability in cognitive functions in the elderly: implications for societal participation. Basic Life Sci. 43, 191–211 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nichols, T.A., Rogers, W.A., Fisk, A.D.: Design for aging. In: Salvendy, G. (ed.) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn, pp. 1418–1445. Wiley, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  31. CCS20 Test, www.intelligencetest.com. Accessed November 2009

  32. Rentz, D.M., Huh, T.J., Faust, R.R., Budson, A.E., Scinto, L.F., Sperling, R.A., Daffner, K.R.: Use of IQ-adjusted norms to predict progressive cognitive decline in highly intelligent older individuals. Neuropsychology 18(1), 38–49 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been funded by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. M. Langdon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Langdon, P.M., Lewis, T. & Clarkson, P.J. Prior experience in the use of domestic product interfaces. Univ Access Inf Soc 9, 209–225 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-009-0169-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-009-0169-9

Keywords

Navigation