Understanding age and technology experience differences in use of prior knowledge for everyday technology interactions

ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2012, Pages

  O'Brien, Marita A ^a   Rogers, Wendy A ^b   Fisk, Arthur D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN HUNTSVILLE   (United States)

^b GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Design; Human Factors

Indexed keywords

AGE GROUPS; DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS; HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGY; HIGH TECH; HIGH TECHNOLOGY; INTERNET TECHNOLOGY; OLDER ADULTS; PRIOR KNOWLEDGE;

DESIGN; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN ENGINEERING;

TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84859407351     PISSN: 19367228     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2141943.2141947     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. ACKERMAN, P. L. AND ROLFHUS, E. L. 1999. The locus of adult intelligence: Knowledge, abilities, and nonability traits. Psych. Aging 14, 314-330. (Pubitemid 29291567)
2. BEIER, M. E. AND ACKERMAN, P. L. 2005. Age, ability, and the role of prior knowledge on the acquisition of new domain knowledge: Promising results in a real-world learning environment. Psych. Aging, 20, 341-355. (Pubitemid 41023413)
3. BLACKLER, A. 2006. Intuitive interaction with complex artifacts. Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
4. BLACKLER, A., POPOVIC, V., AND MAHAR, D. 2003. The nature of intuitive use of products: An experimental approach. Des. Stud. 24, 491-506.
5. BLACKLER, A., POPOVIC, V., AND MAHAR, D. P. 2010 Investigating users' intuitive interaction with complex artefacts. Appl. Ergon. 41, 72-92.
6. CARROLL, J. M. ANDMACK, R. L. 1984. Learning to use a word processor: By doing, by thinking, and by knowing. In Human Factors in Computer Systems, J. C. Thomas and M. L. Schneider, Eds., Ablex Publishing Corp., Norwood, NJ, 13-51.
7. CZAJA, S. J.,CHARNESS, N.,DIJKSTRA, K.,FISK, A. D.,ROGERS,W. A., AND SHARIT, J. 2006b. Center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement: Computer and technology experience questionnaire (CREATE-TR-2006-03). University of Miami.
8. CZAJA, S. J., CHARNESS, N., FISK, A. D., HERTZOG, C., NAIR, S. N., ROGERS, W. A., AND SHARIT, J. 2006a. Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psych. Aging 21, 333-352. (Pubitemid 44212031)
9. DJAJADININGRAT, T.,WENSVEEN, S.,FRENS, J., AND OVERBEEKE, C. 2004. Tangible products: Redressing the balance between appearance and action, Pers. Ubiq. Comput. 8, 294-309.
10. DOCAMPO RAMA, M. 2001. Technology generations: Handling complex user interfaces. Doctoral dissertation, Technical University of Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
11. FREUDENTHAL, A. AND MOOK, H. J. 2003. The evaluation of an innovative intelligent thermostat interface: Universal usability and age differences. Cogn. Techn. Work 5, 55-66. (Pubitemid 36658451)
12. FREUDENTHAL, T. D. 2001. The role of age, foreknowledge and complexity in learning to operate a complex device. Behav. Inf. Techn. 20, 23-35.
13. FU, W.-T. AND GRAY, W. D. 2004. Resolving the paradox of the active user: Stable suboptimal performance in interactive tasks. Cogn. Sci. Multidisc. J. 28, 901-935. (Pubitemid 39620372)
14. GOODMAN, J., SYME, A., AND EISMA, R. 2003. Older adults' use of computers. In Proceedings of the British Computer Society Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.
15. GORARD, S. AND SELWYN, N. 2008. The myth of the silver surfer. Adults Learn. 19, 5, 28-30.
16. GRAY,W. D. AND FU,W.-T. 2004. Soft constraints in interactive behavior: The case of ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head. Cogn. Sci. 28, 359-382. (Pubitemid 38670704)
17. HEALY, M. R., LIGHT, L. L., AND CHUNG, C. 2005. Dual-process models of associative recognition in young and older adults: Evidence from receiver operating characteristics. J. Exp. Psych. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 31, 768-788. (Pubitemid 41168521)
18. HERTZOG, C., LINEWEAVER, T. T., ANDMCGUIRE, C. L. 1999. Beliefs about memory and aging. In Social Cognition and Aging, T. M. Hess and F. Blanchard-Fields, Eds., Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 43-68.
19. HORRIGAN, J. 2007. A typology of information and communication technology users. http://www.pewinternet .org/~/media/Files/Reports/2007/PIP ICT Typology.pdf.
20. HURTIENNE, J. AND LANGDON, P. 2009. Prior knowledge in inclusive design: The older, the more intuitive? In Proceedings of the 23rd British Computer SocietyHuman Computer InteractionWorkshop and Conference (HCI'09).
21. HURTIENNE, J.,HORN, A.-M., AND LANGDON, P. M. 2010. Facets of prior experience and their impact on product usability for older users. In Designing Inclusive Interactions, P. M. Langdon, P. J. Clarkson, and P. Robinson, Eds., Springer, 123-132.
22. ISO. 2006. Ease of operation of everyday products - Part 1: Design requirements for context of use and user characteristics. ISO Standard 20282-1:2006(E).
23. JACELON, C. S. AND IMPERIO, K. 2005. Participant diaries as a source of data in research with older adults. Qual. Health Res. 15, 991-997. (Pubitemid 41358761)
24. KANG, N. E. AND YOON, W. C. 2008. Age- and experience-related user behavior differences in the use of complicated electronic devices. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 66, 425-437.
25. LANGDON, P., LEWIS, T., AND CLARKSON, J. 2007. The effects of prior experience on the use of consumer products. Univ. Access .Inf. Soc. 6, 179-191. (Pubitemid 47307838)
26. LAWRY, S., POPOVIC, V., AND BLACKLER, A. 2010. Identifying familiarity in older and younger adults. In Proceedings of the Design Research Society International Conference.
27. LEONARDI, C., MENNECOZZI, C., NOT, E., PIANESI, F., AND ZANCANARO, M. 2008. Designing a familiar technology for elderly people, by the NETCARITY (IST2005-045508) European project. http://i3.fbk.eu/ en/system/files/Leonardi Designing+Familiar+technology.pdf.
28. LEUNG, R.,MCGRENERE, J., AND GRAF, P. 2011. Age-related differences in the initial usability of mobile device icons. Behav. Inf. Techn. 30, 629-642.
29. LINDENBERGER, U.,KLEIGL, R., AND BALTES, P. B. 1992. Professional expertise does not eliminate age differences in imagery-based memory performance during adulthood. Psych. Aging 7, 585-593.
30. MCGILL, T., WYER, P. C., NEWMAN, T. B., KEITZ, S., LEIPZIG, R., AND GUYATT, G. 2004. Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic). Can. Med. Assoc. J. 171, 1369-1373. (Pubitemid 39573841)
31. MELENHORST, A.-S., ROGERS, W. A., AND BOUWHUIS, D.G. 2006. Older adults' motivated choice for technological innovation: Evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psych. Aging 21, 190-195. (Pubitemid 44212059)
32. MICRO AUDIOMETRICS 2008. Earscan audiometer. sales@microaud.com.
33. MITZNER, T. L., FAUSSET, C. B., BORON, J. B., ADAMS, A. E., DIJKSTRA, K., LEE, C. C., AND FISK, A. D. 2008. Older adults' training preferences for learning to use technology. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 52nd Annual Meeting. HFES, Santa Monica, CA, 2047-2051.
34. MONK, A., BLYTHE, M., AND KIM, H. 2010. What do people want from the technology in their homes: Work at the Centre for Usable Home Technology (CUHTec). In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces. 313-318.
35. MYKITYSHYN, A. L., FISK, A. D., AND ROGERS, W. A. 2002. Learning to use a home medical device: Mediating age-related differences with training. Human Factors 44, 354-364. (Pubitemid 35448638)
36. NEO INSIGHT. 2007. Day in the Life. www.neoinsight.com.
37. NEWELL, A. F. 2008. Accessible computing - Past trends and future suggestions. ACM Trans. Access Comput. 1, 2, Article 9, 1-7.
38. NIELSEN, J. 2010. College students on the web: User experience guidelines. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ students.html.
39. NORMAN, D. A. 2002. The design of everyday things. Basic Books, New York.
40. O'BRIEN, M. A. 2010. Understanding human-technology interactions: The role of prior experience and age. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
41. O'BRIEN, M. A. AND ROGERS, W. A. Design for aging: Enhancing everyday technology use. In Engaging Older Adults with Modern Technology: Internet Use and Information Access Needs, R. Z. Zheng, R. D. Hill, and M. K. Gardner, Eds., IGI Publishing, Hershey, PA, To appear.
42. O'BRIEN, M. A., ROGERS, W. A., AND FISK, A. D. 2009a. Discerning prior knowledge use by older adults in human technology interactions. The Southern Gerontological Society Annual Meeting.
43. O'BRIEN, M. A., ROGERS, W. A., AND FISK, A. D. 2009b. The role of prior experience in everyday technology interactions. The 62nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Gerontological Society of America.
44. O'HARA, K. P. AND PAYNE, S. J. 1998. The effects of operator implementation cost on planfulness of problem solving and learning. Cogn. Psych. 35, 34-70. (Pubitemid 128428608)
45. OLSON, K. E., O'BRIEN, M. A., ROGERS, W. A., AND FISK, A. D. 2011. Diffusion of technology for younger and older adults. Ageing Int. 36, 1, 123-145.
46. OULASVIRTA, A., WAHLSTRÖM, M., AND ERICSSON, K. A. 2011. What does it mean to be good at using a mobile device? An investigation of three levels of experience and skill. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 69, 3, 155-169.
47. OWNBY, R, CZAJA S. J., LOEWENSTEIN, D., AND RUBERT, M. 2008. Cognitive abilities that predict success in a computer-based training program. Gerontol. 48, 170-180. (Pubitemid 351705982)
48. POLSON, P.G. AND LEWIS, C.H. 1990. Theory-based design for easily learned interfaces. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, 191-220.
49. PREACHER, K. J. 2001. Calculation for the chi-square test: An interactive calculation tool for chi-square tests of goodness of fit and independence. http://quantpsy.org.
50. REASON, J. T. 1990. Human Error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
51. RIEMAN, J. 1996. A field study of exploratory learning strategies. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 3, 189-218.
52. ROGERS, W. A., O'BRIEN, M. A., AND FISK, A. D. In Press. Cognitive engineering to support successful aging. In Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Engineering, J. D. Lee and A. Kirlik, Eds., Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
53. SEALE, C. 1999. The Quality of Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications, London.
54. SELWYN, N. 2004. The information aged: A qualitative study of older adults' use of information and communications technology. J. Aging Stud. 18, 369-384. (Pubitemid 39303134)
55. SERRANO BAQUERO, D., AND ROGERs, W. A. 2010. Knowledge and intuitive interaction design: Developing a knowledge taxonomy. Tech. rep. HFA-TR-1004, Georgia Tech, gatech.edu/hfa.
56. SHARIT, J., HERNANDEZ, M. A., CZAJA, S. J., AND PIROLLI, P. 2008. Investigating the roles of knowledge and cognitive abilities in older adult information seeking on the web. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 15, 1, 3, 25.
57. SHARP, K. 1998. The case for case studies in nursing research: The problem of generalization. J. Adv. Nursing, 27, 785-790.
58. SHIPLEY, W. C. 1940. A self-administering scale for measuring intellectual impairment and deterioration. J. Psych. Interdisc. Appl. 9, 371-377.
59. SINGLEY, M. K. AND ANDERSON, J.R. 1987. A keystroke analysis of learning and transfer in text editing. Hum.- Comput. Interact. 3, 223.
60. VANCE, A. 2010. With Kinect, Microsoft aims for game changer. The New York Times.
61. VERBI SOFTWARE. 2007. MAXQDA. info@maxqda.com.
62. WECHSLER, D. 1997. Wechsler Memory Scale III. (3rd ed.). The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, TX.
63. YONELINAS, A. P. 2002. The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. J. Mem. Lang. 46, 441-517.
64. ZACKS, R. T., HASHER, L., AND LI, K. Z. H. 2000. Human memory. In The Handbook of Aging and Cognition (2nd Ed.), F. I. M. Craik and T. A. Salthouse, Eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Mahwah, NJ. 293-357.
65. ZICKUHR, K. 2011. Generations and their gadgets. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Generations-and- gadgets.aspx.