skip to main content
10.1145/3472301.3484366acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesihcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Voice and touch interaction: a user experience comparison of elderly people in smartphones

Published: 18 October 2021 Publication History

Abstract

The use of digital technologies has contributed to improve the quality of life in the human aging process in several aspects. However, most of these technologies are not designed for the elderly audience, which makes the user experience (UX) difficult. In smartphones, low acceptance is related, among other factors, to physical and cognitive limitations imposed by age, which make it difficult for the elderly to interact with these devices. The problems reported are mainly related to low vision and reduced memory and motor skills. For reasons such as these, voice interfaces have been gaining ground, given that speech is natural for human beings and reduces dependence on graphical interfaces. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess whether voice interaction improves the UX of elderly people when interacting with smartphones. An experiment was conducted, with 20 elderly people, from the combination of qualitative and quantitative research elements. Participants received a list of tasks to be performed with the aid of a smartphone and were divided into two groups: one group performed the tasks first through voice interaction and then through touch, and the other group followed the opposite order. The results showed that the main advantages of voice interfaces are related to the reduction of dependence on vision, practicality, speed and ease regarding motor issues. Some barriers were also found, such as problems related to forgetting, complications in the elaboration of commands, speech rate and barriers in learning new technologies. The final results suggest that voice interaction improves the UX of elderly people with smartphones, compared to touch interaction.

References

[1]
Ageing. United Nations. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/sections/issuesdepth/ageing/index.html.
[2]
World Population Ageing. 2017. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WPA2017_Report.pdf.
[3]
Peek, S.T.M. et al. 2014. Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 83, 4 (Apr. 2014), 235--248.
[4]
Wong, C.Y. et al. 2018. Usability and Design Issues of Smartphone User Interface and Mobile Apps for Older Adults. Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer Singapore. 93--104.
[5]
Smith, A.W. 2019. User experience design for older adults. Proceedings of the 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication (Oct. 2019).
[6]
Gregor, P. et al. 2002. Designing for dynamic diversity. Proceedings of the fifth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies - Assets '02 (2002).
[7]
Hanson, V.L. 2010. Influencing technology adoption by older adults. Interacting with Computers. 22, 6 (Nov. 2010), 502--509.
[8]
Newell, A.F. 2011. Design and the Digital Divide: Insights from 40 Years in Computer Support for Older and Disabled People. Synthesis Lectures on Assistive, Rehabilitative, and Health-Preserving Technologies. 1, 1 (Jun. 2011), 1--195.
[9]
Petrovčič, A. et al. 2018. Smart but not adapted enough: Heuristic evaluation of smartphone launchers with an adapted interface and assistive technologies for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior. 79, (Feb. 2018), 123--136.
[10]
Barnard, Y. et al. 2013. Learning to use new technologies by older adults: Perceived difficulties, experimentation behaviour and usability. Computers in Human Behavior. 29, 4 (Jul. 2013), 1715--1724.
[11]
Babic, S. et al. 2018. Perceived user experience and performance of intelligent personal assistants employed in higher education settings. 2018 41st International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) (May 2018).
[12]
Kowalski, J. et al. 2019. Older Adults and Voice Interaction. Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (May 2019).
[13]
O'Brien, K. et al. 2019. Voice-Controlled Intelligent Personal Assistants to Support Aging in Place. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 68, 1 (Oct. 2019), 176--179.
[14]
Ziman, R. and Walsh, G. 2018. Factors Affecting Seniors' Perceptions of Voice-enabled User Interfaces. Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Apr. 2018).
[15]
Wulf, L. et al. 2014. Hands free - care free. Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (Oct. 2014).
[16]
Kim, S. 2021. Exploring How Older Adults Use a Smart Speaker-Based Voice Assistant in Their First Interactions: Qualitative Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth. 9, 1 (Jan. 2021), e20427.
[17]
Sayago, S. et al. 2019. Voice assistants and older people. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces - CUI '19 (2019).
[18]
Porcheron, M. et al. 2018. Voice Interfaces in Everyday Life. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Apr. 2018).
[19]
Whitenton, K. 2017. Voice First: The Future of Interaction? Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/voice-first/.
[20]
Whitenton, K. 2017. Audio Signifiers for Voice Interaction. Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/audio-signifiers-voice-interaction/
[21]
Google Assistant. Retrieved from https://assistant.google.com/.
[22]
Kocabalil, A.B. et al. 2018. Measuring User Experience in Conversational Interfaces: A Comparison of Six Questionnaires. (Jul. 2018).
[23]
Nielsen, J. and Norman, D. 2019. The Definition of User Experience (UX). Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/definition-user-experience/.
[24]
Hassenzahl, M. and Tractinsky, N. 2006. User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology. 25, 2 (Mar. 2006), 91--97.
[25]
Biduski, D. et al. 2020. Assessing long-term user experience on a mobile health application through an in-app embedded conversation-based questionnaire. Computers in Human Behavior. 104, (Mar. 2020), 106169.
[26]
Wohlin, C. et al. 2012. Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.
[27]
Brooke, J. 2013. SUS: a retrospective. Journal of usability studies. 8, 2, 29--40.
[28]
Desmet, P.M.A. et al. 2016. Mood measurement with Pick-A-Mood: review of current methods and design of a pictorial self-report scale. J. of Design Research. 14, 3 (2016), 241.
[29]
Bertolucci, P.H.F. et al. 1994. O Mini-Exame do Estado Mental em uma população geral: impacto da escolaridade. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria. 52, 1 (Mar. 1994), 01--07.
[30]
Brucki, S.M.D. et al. 2003. Sugestões para o uso do mini-exame do estado mental no Brasil. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria. 61, 3B (Sep. 2003), 777--781.
[31]
Arhippainen, L. 2009. Studying user experience: issues and problems of mobile services-Case ADAMOS: User experience (im) possible to catch? Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Oulu, Finland.
[32]
Nariman, D. 2011. Evaluating User Expectancy and Satisfaction of e-Government Portals. 2011 International Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems (Jun. 2011).
[33]
Turunen, M. et al. 2009. SUXES-user experience evaluation method for spoken and multimodal interaction. Tenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association.
[34]
Bardln, Lawrence. 1977. Análise de conteúdo. 70, 225.
[35]
Luger, E. and Sellen, A. 2016. "Like Having a Really Bad PA." Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (May 2016).
[36]
Reyes, A. et al. 2016. A standardized review of smartphone applications to promote balance for older adults. Disability and Rehabilitation. 40, 6 (Nov. 2016), 690--696.
[37]
Kim, K. et al. 2017. Digital technology to enable aging in place. Experimental Gerontology. 88, (Feb. 2017), 25--31.
[38]
Takagi, H. et al. 2018. Evaluating speech-based question-answer interactions for elder-care services. IBM Journal of Research and Development. 62, 1 (Jan. 2018), 6:1--6:10.
[39]
Chin, J. et al. 2015. Cognition and Health Literacy in Older Adults' Recall of Self-Care Information. The Gerontologist. (Jul. 2015), gnv091.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Investigating Accessibility at the Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC)Proceedings of the XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3702038.3702098(1-18)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2024
  • (2024)EasyAsk: An In-App Contextual Tutorial Search Assistant for Older Adults with Voice and Touch InputsProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36785168:3(1-27)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Digital Accessibility at the Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC): An Updated Systematic Literature ReviewProceedings of the XXII Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3638067.3638075(1-15)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023

Index Terms

  1. Voice and touch interaction: a user experience comparison of elderly people in smartphones

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    IHC '21: Proceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    October 2021
    523 pages
    ISBN:9781450386173
    DOI:10.1145/3472301
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    In-Cooperation

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 18 October 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Elderly
    2. Evaluation
    3. User Experience
    4. Voice Interfaces

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    IHC '21

    Acceptance Rates

    IHC '21 Paper Acceptance Rate 29 of 77 submissions, 38%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 331 of 973 submissions, 34%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)52
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
    Reflects downloads up to 07 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Investigating Accessibility at the Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC)Proceedings of the XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3702038.3702098(1-18)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2024
    • (2024)EasyAsk: An In-App Contextual Tutorial Search Assistant for Older Adults with Voice and Touch InputsProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36785168:3(1-27)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2024
    • (2023)Digital Accessibility at the Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC): An Updated Systematic Literature ReviewProceedings of the XXII Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3638067.3638075(1-15)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media