Carla Tubin
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.
- Ageing. United Nations. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/sections/issuesdepth/ageing/index.html.Google Scholar
- World Population Ageing. 2017. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WPA2017_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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.Google Scholar
- Smith, A.W. 2019. User experience design for older adults. Proceedings of the 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication (Oct. 2019).Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gregor, P. et al. 2002. Designing for dynamic diversity. Proceedings of the fifth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies - Assets '02 (2002).Google Scholar
- Hanson, V.L. 2010. Influencing technology adoption by older adults. Interacting with Computers. 22, 6 (Nov. 2010), 502--509. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.09.001.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2200/s00369ed1v01y201106arh001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.021.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.006.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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).Google Scholar
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.16217.Google Scholar
- 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).Google Scholar
- Wulf, L. et al. 2014. Hands free - care free. Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (Oct. 2014).Google Scholar
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2196/20427.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sayago, S. et al. 2019. Voice assistants and older people. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces - CUI '19 (2019).Google Scholar
- Porcheron, M. et al. 2018. Voice Interfaces in Everyday Life. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Apr. 2018).Google ScholarDigital Library
- Whitenton, K. 2017. Voice First: The Future of Interaction? Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/voice-first/.Google Scholar
- Whitenton, K. 2017. Audio Signifiers for Voice Interaction. Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/audio-signifiers-voice-interaction/Google Scholar
- Google Assistant. Retrieved from https://assistant.google.com/.Google Scholar
- Kocabalil, A.B. et al. 2018. Measuring User Experience in Conversational Interfaces: A Comparison of Six Questionnaires. (Jul. 2018).Google Scholar
- 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/.Google Scholar
- Hassenzahl, M. and Tractinsky, N. 2006. User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology. 25, 2 (Mar. 2006), 91--97. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330331.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106169.Google Scholar
- Wohlin, C. et al. 2012. Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
- Brooke, J. 2013. SUS: a retrospective. Journal of usability studies. 8, 2, 29--40.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1504/jdr.2016.10000563.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1590/s0004-282x1994000100001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1590/s0004-282x2003000500014.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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.Google Scholar
- Nariman, D. 2011. Evaluating User Expectancy and Satisfaction of e-Government Portals. 2011 International Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems (Jun. 2011).Google ScholarDigital Library
- Turunen, M. et al. 2009. SUXES-user experience evaluation method for spoken and multimodal interaction. Tenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association.Google Scholar
- Bardln, Lawrence. 1977. Análise de conteúdo. 70, 225.Google Scholar
- 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).Google Scholar
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1250124.Google Scholar
- Kim, K. et al. 2017. Digital technology to enable aging in place. Experimental Gerontology. 88, (Feb. 2017), 25--31. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2016.11.013.Google Scholar
- 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. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1147/jrd.2017.2768720.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chin, J. et al. 2015. Cognition and Health Literacy in Older Adults' Recall of Self-Care Information. The Gerontologist. (Jul. 2015), gnv091. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnv091.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Voice and touch interaction: a user experience comparison of elderly people in smartphones
Recommendations
Towards a human-computer interaction model for voice user interfaces
CLIHC '19: Proceedings of the IX Latin American Conference on Human Computer InteractionThe user interaction with computer systems has evolved over the years, from Command Line Interfaces (CLIs), Graphics User Interfaces (GUIs), Natural User Interfaces (NUIs) and actually Voice User Interfaces (VUIs). The use of VUIs is increasingly common,...
Design and evaluation of an exergame for motor-cognitive training and fall prevention in older adults
Goodtechs '18: Proceedings of the 4th EAI International Conference on Smart Objects and Technologies for Social GoodExergames have emerged as a strategy to promote physical activity and cognitive tasks through entertainment, being a promising solution for multicomponent training and fall prevention in older adults. Even though seniors may enjoy playing, game design ...
Touch panel usability of elderly and children
This research utilizes Fitt's Law to measure the performance of using touch panels.This research find out the usability for the elderly, young adult and children using four different-sized touch panels.This research provides suggestions of applications ...
Comments