New heuristics for understanding older adults as web users

Technical Communication

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 39-59

  Chisnell, Dana E ^a,b   Redish, Janice C ^a,c   Lee, Amy ^d  

^a Usability Professionals Association ^*

^b Usability Professionals Association

^c Redish and Associates Inc   (United States)

^d AARP   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33644683603     PISSN: 00493155     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Battle, L., and D. Hoffman. 2004. Design patterns and guidelines for usable and accessible Web applications. Usability Professionals' Association proceedings. CD-ROM publication.
2. Carliner, S. 2002. Physical, cognitive, and affective: A three part framework for information design. http://www.saulcarliner.home.att.net/id/ newmodel.htm#definition.
3. Chadwick-Dias, A., M. McNulty, and T. Tullis. 2003. Web usability and age: How design changes can improve performance. ACM SIGCAPH: Computers and the physically handicapped, Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Universal Usability, Vancouver, BC: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 30-37.
4. _, D. Tedesco, and T. Tullis. 2004. Late breaking result papers: Older adults and Web usability: Is Web experience the same as Web expertise? Extended abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems. Vienna, Austria: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 1391-1394.
5. Chisnell, D., and J. C. Redish. 2004. Designing Web sites for older adults: A review of recent, relevant research. Washington, DC: AARP Services, Inc.
6. _. 2005a. Designing Web sites for older adults: Expert review of usability for older adults at 50 web sites. Washington, DC: AARP Services, Inc. http://aarp.org/olderwiserwired.
7. _. 2005b. Who is the older adult in your audience? Intercom (January): 10-14.
8. Czaja, S. J., and C. C. Lee. 2003. Designing computer systems for older adults. In The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications. Ed. Julie A. Jacko and Andrew Sears. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 414-427.
9. Fox, S. 2004. Older Americans and the Internet. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewlnternet.org/ppf/r/117/ report_display.asp.
10. Gregor, P., A. F. Newell, and M. Zajicek. 2002. Solutions for aging: Designing for dynamic diversity: Interfaces for older people. Proceedings of the Fifth International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, www.portal.acm.org/ citation.cfm?id=638277andcoll=ACManddl=ACMandCFID= 24990302andCFTOKEN=8864524.
11. Hawthorn, D. 2003. How universal is good design for older users? ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the physically handicapped, Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Universal Usability. Vancouver, BC: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 38-45.
12. Jacko, J. A., I. U. Scott, F. Sainfort, K. P. Moloney, T. Kongnakorn, B. S. Zorich, and K. E. Emery. 2002. Effects of multimodal feedback on the performance of older adults with normal and impaired vision. Universal access: Theoretical perspectives, practice, and experience (7th ERCIM International Workshop on User Interfaces for All. Paris, France, October 2002. Revised Papers). Berlin, Germany: Springer, pp. 3-22.
13. Kantner, L., and S. Rosenbaum. 2003. Usable computers for the elderly: Applying coaching experiences. Proceedings of the IEEE Professional Communication Conference, http://www.teced.com/PDFs/ipcc_2003.pdf
14. Lee, A., and D. Chisnell. 2004. Communicating with older audiences. Proceedings of the 51 st STC Annual Conference. Arlington, VA: Society for Technical Communication, http://www.stc.org/51stConf/sessionMaterial/dataShow. asp?ID=143.
15. Lippincott, G. 2004. Gray matters: Where are the technical communicators in research and design for aging audiences?. IEEE transactions on professional communication 47:157-170.
16. Microsoft. 2004. Design of visual elements. http://msdn.microsoft.com/ library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwue/html/ch14c.asp.
17. Morrell, R. W., S. R. Dailey, C. Feldman, C. B. Mayhorn, and K. V. Echt. 2003. Older adults and information technology: A compendium of scientific research and web site accessibility guidelines. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Aging, http://www.nih.nia.gov.
18. Nielsen, J. and R. Molich. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. Proceedings of. ACM CHI'90 Conference. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 249-256.
19. Reitsma, R., Torris, T., and J. van Kruijsdik. 2003. The net clicks with European seniors. http://www.forrester.com/ER/Research/Brief/Excerpt/0,1317, 16536.00.html.
20. Reis, F. 2005. Statistics in focus, http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/cache/ ITY_OFFPUB/KS-NP-05-009/EN/KS-NP-05-009-EN.PDF.
21. Rosenfeld, L., and P. Morville. 2002. Information architecture for the World Wide Web. 2nd ed. Beijing, PRC: O'Reilly.
22. Statistics Canada. 2004. Internet use rates, by location of access and age of head of household. http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/arts54a.htm.
23. Theofanos, M., and J. C. Redish. 2005. Helping low-vision and other users with Web sites that meet their needs: Is one site for all feasible?. Technical communication 52:9-20.
24. White, L., J. Jerrams-Smith, and D. Heathcote. 2001. Improving access for elderly and severely disabled persons: A hybrid adaptive and generic interface. In Universal access in HCl: Towards an information society for all. Ed. C. Stephanidis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1025-1028.
25. Wikipedia. 2005. Heuristic, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic.
26. Wright, P. 2000. Supportive documentation for older people. In Interface design and document design. Ed. C. Jansen, R. Punselie, and P. Westendorp. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Editions Rodopi BV, pp. 31-43.