Leah Findlater
Jon E. Froehlich
Jacob O. Wobbrock
ABSTRACT
Despite the apparent popularity of touchscreens for older adults, little is known about the psychomotor performance of these devices. We compared performance between older adults and younger adults on four desktop and touchscreen tasks: pointing, dragging, crossing and steering. On the touchscreen, we also examined pinch-to-zoom. Our results show that while older adults were significantly slower than younger adults in general, the touchscreen reduced this performance gap relative to the desktop and mouse. Indeed, the touchscreen resulted in a significant movement time reduction of 35% over the mouse for older adults, compared to only 16% for younger adults. Error rates also decreased.
- Chaparro, A., Bohan, M., Fernandez, J., Choi, S. D., Kattel, B. (1999). The impact of age on computer input device use: Psychophysical and physiological measures. Int'l J. of Industrial Ergonomics, 24, 503--513.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Charness, N., Holley, P., Feddon, J., Jastrzembski, T. (2004). Light pen use and practice minimize age and hand performance differences in pointing tasks. Human Factors, 46(3), 373--384.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cockburn, A., Ahlström, D., Gutwin, C. (2012). Understanding performance in touch selections: Tap, drag and radial pointing drag with finger, stylus and mouse. IJHCS, 70(3), 218--233. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Forlines, C., Wigdor, D., Shen, C., Balakrishnan, R. (2007). Direct-touch vs. mouse input for tabletop displays. Proc. CHI '07, 647--656. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65--70.Google Scholar
- International Organization for Standardization. (2002). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) - Requirements for non-keyboard input devices. Ref. No. ISO 9241-9:2000(E).Google Scholar
- Ketcham, C. J., Seidler, R. D., Van Gemmert, A. W. A., Stelmach, G. E. (2002). Age-related kinematic differences as influenced by task difficulty, target size, and movement amplitude. Journal of Gerontology, 57(1), 54--64.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kobayashi, M., Hiyama, A., Miura, T., Asakawa, C., Hirose, M., Ifukube, T. (2011). Elderly user evaluation of mobile touchscreen interactions. Proc. IFIP Interact 2011, 83--99. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leonardi, C., Albertini, A., Pianesi, F., Zancanaro, M. (2010). An exploratory study of a touch-based gestural interface for elderly. Proc. NordiCHI '10, 845--850. Google ScholarDigital Library
- MacKenzie, I. S. and Isokoski, P. (2008). Fitts' throughput and the speed-accuracy tradeoff. Proc. CHI '08, 1633--1636. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Parhi, P., Karlson, A. K., Bederson, B. B. (2006). Target size study for one-handed thumb use on small touchscreen devices. Proc. MobileHCI '06, 203--210. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Piper, A. M., Campbell, R., Hollan, J. D. (2010). Exploring the accessibility and appeal of surface computing for older adult health care support. Proc. CHI 2010, 907--916. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., McLaughlin, A. C., & Pak, R. (2005). Touch a screen or turn a knob: Choosing the best device for the job. Human Factors, 47(2), 271--288.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schneider, N., Wilkes, J., Grandt, M., Schlick, C. M. (2008). Investigation of input devices for the age-differentiated design of human-computer interaction. Proc. HFES, 52, 144--148.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sears, A., Shneiderman, B. (1991). High precision touchscreens: design strategies and comparisons with a mouse. International J. of Man-Machine Studies, 34(4), 593--613. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Smith, M. W., Sharit, J., Czaja, S. J. (1999). Aging, motor control, and the performance of computer mouse tasks. Human Factors, 41(3), 389--396.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stößel, C., Blessing, L. (2010). Mobile Device Interaction Gestures for Older users. Proc. NordiCHI 2010, 793--796. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Walker, N., Philbin, D. A., Fisk, A. D. (1997). Age-related differences in movement control: adjusting submovement structure to optimize performance. J. of Gerontology, 52B(1), 40--52.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Rushing, A., Bechtel, L., & Gilbert, J. (2005). Use of computer input devices by older adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 24(5), 419--438.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Age-related differences in performance with touchscreens compared to traditional mouse input
Recommendations
Age-Related Differences in Gross Motor Skills
ITAP '16: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Interactive Technology and Ageing PopulationsBody-based interfaces have recently attracted much attention. In such interfaces, gross motor skills are critical in providing a safe and pleasant experience. However, little is known about gross motor performance, particularly on the age-related ...
Effects of Aging on Small Target Selection with Touch Input
Age-related declines in physical and cognitive function can result in target selection difficulties that hinder device operation. Previous studies have detailed the different types of target selection errors encountered, as well as how they vary with ...
Confronting Common Assumptions About the Psychomotor Abilities of Older Adults Interacting with Touchscreens
Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Acceptance, Communication and ParticipationAbstractThis paper confronts commonly-made assumptions about older adults and their general levels of capability when interacting with technology by reporting from an evaluation involving 49 older adults (M = 81 years) where performance was studied during ...
Comments