skip to main content
10.1145/3640794.3665882acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Unravelling the Paradigm: Prioritizing Process over Results—Sports Training as a Catalyst for Age-Friendly CUI Design

Published: 08 July 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Existing accessibility research may unintentionally marginalize older adults and exacerbate the digital divide. Emerging Conversational User Interfaces (CUI), particularly in essential sectors like finance, lack age-friendliness design. Through a review of CUI literature, we illustrate how existing evidence underscores the prevalent exclusion of older adults in research and design. The exclusion of this demographic is stark and more pronounced in services in many critical domains, e.g., finance. To rectify this, we must fundamentally alter our approach to CUI design to actively involve older adults from its inception. We argue that we need fundamental shifts in our methods, prioritizing processes over specific outcomes in design methodologies. This entails close collaboration with older adults throughout the research and design to gain deep insights into their needs, mental models, and expectations. It is time to confront these biases and ensure equitable access for all.

References

[1]
Abood, M., Kali, K., & Zdenek, R. (2015). What can we do to help? Adopting age-friendly banking to improve financial well-being for older adults (No. 2015-1). Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
[2]
AARP Age UK. 2016. Age-friendly banking-What it is and how you do it. Retrieved Jan 20, 2021 from https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/ageuk/documents/reports-and-publications/reports-and-briefings/moneymatters/rb_april16_age_friendly_banking.pdf.
[3]
Artemis, A. (2015, December 4). Focus on the process, not the outcome [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://ironbodybyartemis.com/2015/12/04/focus-on-the-process-not-the-outcome/.
[4]
Asmi, F., & Ishaya, T. (2012, October). Understanding the behavior of the elderly towards Internet Banking in the UK. In proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Social Eco-Informatics, October (pp. 21-26).
[5]
Box, G. E., & Meyer, R. D. (1986). An analysis for unreplicated fractional factorials. Technometrics, 28(1), 11-18.
[6]
Brewer, R. N., & Piper, A. M. (2017). xPress: Rethinking design for aging and accessibility through a voice-based online blogging community. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 26.
[7]
Chancellor, S., Baumer, E. P., & De Choudhury, M. (2019). Who is the" human" in human-centered machine learning: The case of predicting mental health from social media. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), 1-32.
[8]
Camilleri, S. J., & Grech, G. (2017). The relevance of age categories in explaining internet banking adoption rates and customers' attitudes towards the service. Camilleri, SJ, and G. Grech, 29-47.
[9]
Chu, L., Chen, H. W., Cheng, P. Y., Ho, P., Weng, I. T., Yang, P. L., ... & Yeh, S. L. (2019). Identifying features that enhance older adults’ acceptance of robots: a mixed methods study. Gerontology, 65(4), 441-450.
[10]
Craft, R. C., & Leake, C. (2002). The Pareto principle in organizational decision making. Management Decision.
[11]
Desai, S., Lundy, M., & Chin, J. (2023, July). “A Painless Way to Learn:” Designing an Interactive Storytelling Voice User Interface to Engage Older Adults in Informal Health Information Learning. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (pp. 1-16).
[12]
DeVaney, S. A. (2008). Financial issues of older adults. In Handbook of consumer finance research (pp. 209-221). Springer, New York, NY.
[13]
Disability. (2021). Retrieved 20 December 2021, from https://www.who.int/health-topics/disability#tab=tab_1.
[14]
Fang, M. L., Canham, S. L., Battersby, L., Sixsmith, J., Wada, M., & Sixsmith, A. (2019). Exploring privilege in the digital divide: implications for theory, policy, and practice. The Gerontologist, 59(1), e1-e15.
[15]
Gazibara, T., Kurtagic, I., Kisic-Tepavcevic, D., Nurkovic, S., Kovacevic, N., Gazibara, T., & Pekmezovic, T. (2015). Computer and online health information literacy among Belgrade citizens aged 66–89 years. Health promotion international, 31(2), 335-343.
[16]
Gittens, M., Kim, Y., & Godwin, D. (2005, July). The vital few versus the trivial many: examining the Pareto principle for software. In 29th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC'05) (Vol. 1, pp. 179-185). IEEE.
[17]
Harris, M., Cox, K. C., Musgrove, C. F., & Ernstberger, K. W. (2016). Consumer preferences for banking technologies by age groups. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(4), 587-602.
[18]
Henry, S. L., Abou-Zahra, S., & Brewer, J. (2014, April). The role of accessibility in a universal web. In Proceedings of the 11th Web for all Conference (pp. 1-4).
[19]
Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(46), 16385-16389.
[20]
Hu, Y., Qu, Y., Maus, A., & Mutlu, B. (2022, April). Polite or Direct? Conversation Design of a Smart Display for Older Adults Based on Politeness Theory. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-15).
[21]
Inclusive Design. (2021). Retrieved 20 December 2021, from https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/.
[22]
Iqbal, M., & Rizwan, M. (2009, August). Application of 80/20 rule in software engineering Waterfall Model. In 2009 International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies (pp. 223-228). IEEE.
[23]
Jin, X., Kuang, E., & Fan, M. (2021, June). ” Too old to bank digitally?”: A Survey of Banking Practices and Challenges Among Older Adults in China. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (pp. 802-814).
[24]
Knowles, B., Hanson, V. L., Rogers, Y., Piper, A. M., Waycott, J., Davies, N., ... & Yuan, I. Y. (2021). The harm in conflating aging with accessibility. Communications of the ACM, 64(7), 66-71.
[25]
Lappeman, J., Marlie, S., Johnson, T., & Poggenpoel, S. (2022). Trust and digital privacy: willingness to disclose personal information to banking chatbot services. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 1-21.
[26]
Luján-Mora, S., & Masri, F. (2012). Integration of web accessibility into agile methods. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2012) (pp. 123-127).
[27]
Mack, K., McDonnell, E., Jain, D., Lu Wang, L., E. Froehlich, J., & Findlater, L. (2021, May). What do we mean by “accessibility research”? A literature survey of accessibility papers in CHI and ASSETS from 1994 to 2019. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-18).
[28]
Martin-Hammond, A., Vemireddy, S., & Rao, K. (2019). Exploring Older Adults’ Beliefs About the Use of Intelligent Assistants for Consumer Health Information Management: A Participatory Design Study. JMIR Aging, 2(2), e15381.
[29]
Mathur, N., Dhodapkar, K., Zubatiy, T., Li, J., Jones, B., & Mynatt, E. (2022, October). A collaborative approach to support medication management in older adults with mild cognitive impairment using conversational assistants (CAs). In Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (pp. 1-14).
[30]
Mattila, M., Karjaluoto, H., & Pento, T. (2003). Internet banking adoption among mature customers: early majority or laggards?. Journal of services marketing, 17(5), 514-528.
[31]
McCormack, L., Bann, C., Uhrig, J., Berkman, N., & Rudd, R. (2009). Health insurance literacy of older adults. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 43(2), 223-248.
[32]
Nelson, M. L., Hanna, E., Hall, S., & Calvert, M. (2016). What makes stroke rehabilitation patients complex? Clinician perspectives and the role of discharge pressure. Journal of Comorbidity, 6(2), 35–41.
[33]
Nind, M. (2014). What is inclusive research? A&C Black.
[34]
Okoro, C. A., Hollis, N. D., Cyrus, A. C., & Griffin-Blake, S. (2018). Prevalence of disabilities and health care access by disability status and type among adults—United States, 2016. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(32), 8.
[35]
O'Leary, T. K., Stowell, E., Kimani, E., Parmar, D., Olafsson, S., Hoffman, J., ... & Bickmore, T. (2020, October). Community-based cultural tailoring of virtual agents. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (pp. 1-8).
[36]
Omotayo, F. O., & Akinyode, T. A. (2020). Digital inclusion and the elderly: the case of internet banking use and non-use among older adults in Ekiti state, Nigeria. Covenant Journal of Business and Social Sciences.
[37]
Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2015). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14, 505-526.
[38]
Pullin, G., Treviranus, J., Patel, R., & Higginbotham, J. (2017). Designing interaction, voice, and inclusion in AAC research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 33(3), 139-148.
[39]
Qiao, R., Jia, S., Zhao, W., Xia, X., Su, Q., Hou, L., ... & Dong, B. (2022). Prevalence and correlates of disability among urban–rural older adults in Southwest China: a large, population-based study. BMC geriatrics, 22(1), 517.
[40]
Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2012). Convivial toolbox: Generative research for the front end of design. Amsterdam: Bis.
[41]
Sin, J., Chen, D., Threatt, J. G., Gorham, A., & Munteanu, C. (2022, July). Does Alexa Live Up to the Hype? Contrasting Expectations from Mass Media Narratives and Older Adults' Hands-on Experiences of Voice Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (pp. 1-9).
[42]
Sin, J. (2019). Interactive Voice Technologies and the Digital Marginalization of Older Adults. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3338286.3344423.
[43]
Sloane, M., & Moss, E. (2019). AI's social sciences deficit. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(8), 330–331. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0084-6.
[44]
Stenseke, J. (2022). Interdisciplinary Confusion and Resolution in the Context of Moral Machines. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(3), 24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00378-1.
[45]
Stenseke, J. (2021). Artificial virtuous agents: from theory to machine implementation. AI & SOCIETY, 1-20.
[46]
Sterman, J. (2002). System Dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world.
[47]
Thomson, G. (2021). Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). Retrieved 19 December 2021, from https://www.aoda.ca/.
[48]
Tilmes, N. (2022). Disability, fairness, and algorithmic bias in AI recruitment. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(2), 21.
[49]
Torrão, A., Laranjeira, C., Roque, C., & Gil, H. (2020, July). A utilização do e-banking por idosos maiores de 65 anos: estudo de caso no concelho de Castelo Branco (Portugal). In 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI2020), (pp. 1-5). IEEE Xplore Digital Library.
[50]
Treviranus, J. (2014). The value of the statistically insignificant. Educause Review, 49(1), 46-47.
[51]
Treviranus, J. (2018). The three dimensions of Inclusive Design: Part three. Medium.
[52]
Treviranus, J. (2019, May). The value of being different. In Proceedings of the 16th International Web for All Conference (pp. 1-7).
[53]
Trewin, S., Basson, S., Muller, M., Branham, S., Treviranus, J., Gruen, D., ... & Manser, E. (2019). Considerations for AI fairness for people with disabilities. AI Matters, 5(3), 40-63.
[54]
Trewin, S. (2018). AI fairness for people with disabilities: Point of view. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.10670.
[55]
van der Goot, M. J., & Pilgrim, T. (2020). Exploring age differences in motivations for and acceptance of chatbot communication in a customer service context. In Chatbot Research and Design: Third International Workshop, CONVERSATIONS 2019, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, November 19–20, 2019, Revised Selected Papers 3 (pp. 173-186). Springer International Publishing.
[56]
(WAI), W. (2021). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview. Retrieved 19 December 2021, from https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/.
[57]
What is Inclusive Design. (2021). Retrieved 20 December 2021, from https://legacy.idrc.ocadu.ca/about-the-idrc/49-resources/online-resources/articles-and-papers/443-whatisinclusivedesign.
[58]
Whittaker, M., Alper, M., Bennett, C. L., Hendren, S., Kaziunas, L., Mills, M., ... & West, S. M. (2019). Disability, bias, and AI. AI Now Institute, 8.
[59]
World Health Organization. (2017). Developing an ethical framework for healthy ageing: report of a WHO meeting, Tübingen, Germany, 18 March 2017 (No. WHO/HIS/IER/REK/GHE/2017.4). World Health Organization.
[60]
Wood, S., & Lichtenberg, P. A. (2017). Financial capacity and financial exploitation of older adults: Research findings, policy recommendations and clinical implications. Clinical gerontologist, 40(1), 3-13.
[61]
Yaghoubzadeh, R., Kramer, M., Pitsch, K., & Kopp, S. (2013). Virtual agents as daily assistants for elderly or cognitively impaired people: Studies on acceptance and interaction feasibility. In Intelligent Virtual Agents: 13th International Conference, IVA 2013, Edinburgh, UK, August 29-31, 2013. Proceedings 13 (pp. 79-91). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[62]
Hutchinson, B., Prabhakaran, V., Denton, E., Webster, K., Zhong, Y., & Denuyl, S. (2020). Unintended machine learning biases as social barriers for persons with disabilitiess. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing, (125), 1-1.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CUI '24: Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces
July 2024
616 pages
ISBN:9798400705113
DOI:10.1145/3640794
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 July 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Chatbots
  2. Conversational user interfaces
  3. Finance
  4. Inclusive design and research
  5. Older adults
  6. Systems thinking
  7. Voice user interfaces

Qualifiers

  • Extended-abstract
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

CUI '24
Sponsor:
CUI '24: ACM Conversational User Interfaces 2024
July 8 - 10, 2024
Luxembourg, Luxembourg

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 34 of 100 submissions, 34%

Upcoming Conference

CUI '25
ACM Conversational User Interfaces 2025
July 7 - 9, 2025
Waterloo , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 66
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)66
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media