skip to main content
10.1145/1240624.1240676acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

How younger and older adults master the usage of hyperlinks in small screen devices

Published:29 April 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we describe an experiment, in which we examined older and younger adults when interacting with a simulated PDA (personal digital assistant). Independent variables were users' age (young vs. older) and device interface (hyperlink vs. no hyperlink). Dependent variables were the effectiveness and efficiency of menu navigation. To understand how user characteristics influence performance, spatial ability, verbal memory, computer expertise and technical self-confidence were determined. Technology experienced young and older adults (benchmark testing) took part. They had to solve four tasks either with hyperlink interface or without hyperlinks in the interface. The method to collect, to automatically analyze and to structure the data according to interaction sequences and presumed user intentions is a novel approach supported by the open source software tool Clever [12]. The tool is briefly described; more details can be found in [23]. Results revealed that hyperlink interfaces showed overall higher effectiveness. However, the impact of hyperlinks for efficiency was age-related. Younger adults strongly benefit from having hyperlinks. The contrary was the case for older adults, who showed higher menu disorientation when using hyperlinks.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

1240676.mp4

mp4

113 MB

References

  1. Arning, K. & Ziefle, M. Barriers of information access in small screen device applications: The relevance of user characteristics for a trans-generational design. In: User Interfaces for all. LNCS (2006), Berlin, Germany, Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Arning, K. & Ziefle, M. Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance. Computers in Human Behaviour (in press). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bay, S. & Ziefle, M. Design for all: User characteristics to be considered for the design of devices with hierarchical menu structures, In Human Factors in Organizational Design and Management, H. Luczak and K.J. Zink (Eds.), IEA Press, Santa Monica, (2003), 503--508.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Beier, G. Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik {Locus of control when interacting with technology}, Report Psychologie, 24, (1999), 684--693.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Busch, T. Gender Differences in Self-Efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, (1995), 147--158.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Craik, F.I. and Salthouse, T.A. Handbook of Aging and Cognition. Hillsdale, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Czaja, S. J. & Sharit, J. Age differences in the Performance of Computer-based work. Psychology and Aging, 8, (1993), 59--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Downing, R.W.; Moore, J.L. & Brown, S.W. The effects and interaction of spatial visualization and domain expertise on information seeking. Computers in Human Behaviour, 21, (2005),195--209.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Ekstrom, R.B.; French, J.W.; Harman, H.H. & Dermien, D. Manual for the Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Test. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodman, J.; Gray, P.; Khammampad, K. & Brewster, S. Using landmarks to support older people in navigation. In S. Brewster & M. Dunlop (eds.). Mobile Human Computer Interaction. LNCS, (2004), 38--48. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Hasher, L. & Zacks, R. Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G.H. Bower (Ed.). The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 193--225. San Diego: Academic, 1988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jacareto. http://jacareto.sourceforge.net/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Klaudt, D. & Spannagel, C. Computerunterstüütztes Operieren am mentalen Zahlenstrahl {computer supported learning to process mentally represented numbers}. Erziehung und Unterricht, 154 (3-4), (2004), 246--257.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Kieras, D. & Polson P. G. An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22, (1985), 365--394.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Lin, D.M. Age differences in the performance of hypertext perusal. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica: Human Factors Society, (2001), 211--215.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Morrow, D.; Miller, L.S.; Ridolfo, H.; Kokayeff, N.; Chang, D.; Fischer, U. & Stine-Morrow, E. Expertise and aging in a pilot decision making task. In Proceeding of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual meeting (2004), 228--232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. PalmSource Inc. http://www.palmsource.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Park, D. & Schwarz, N. Cognitive Aging. Philadelphia: Buchenan, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Parush, A. & Yuviler-Gavish, T. Web navigation structures in cellular phones. The depth-breadth trade-off issue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60, (2004), 753--770.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Rodger, J.A. & Pendakhar, P.C. A field study of the impact of gender and user's technical experience on the performance of voice-activated medical tracking application. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60, (2004), 529--544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Schroeder, U. & Spannagel, C. The Role of Interaction Records in Active Learning Processes. In: P. Isaias, M. B. Nunes, & A. P. dos Reis (eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS Virtual Multi Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (2005), 99--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Shiffler, G.; Smulders, C.; Correia, J.N.; Hale, JK. & Hahn, W. Gartner Dataquest Market Databook. Gartner Dataquest Inc, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Spannagel, C., Gläser-Zikuda, M., & Schroeder, U. Application of Qualitative Content Analysis in User-Program Interaction Research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), 2006, http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-05/05-2-29-e.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Spannagel, C. Qualitative und quantitative Analyse von Interaktionsaufzeichnungen {qualitative and quantitative analysis of interaction records}. Masterthesis, Technical University Darmstadt, Germany, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Schroeder, U.: PTAH: validation driven software development. In: 5th International Conference on Integrated Design & Process Technology 2000, Dallas, Texas, Juni 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Schroeder, U. & Spannagel, C. Supporting the Active Learning Process, International Journal on E-Learning, 5, 2, (2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Westermann, S.J. Individual differences in the use of command line and menu computer interfaces. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 9, (1995), 183--198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Ziefle, M., & Bay, S. Mental Models of a Cellular Phone Menu. Comparing Older and Younger Novice. In S. Brewster & M. Dunlop (eds.). Mobile Human Computer Interaction. LNCS, (2004), 25--37. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Ziefle, M., & Bay, S. Mental Models of a Cellular Phone Menu. Comparing Older and Younger Novice. In S. Brewster & M. Dunlop (eds.). Mobile Human Computer Interaction. LNCS, (2004), 25--37. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Ziefle, M.; & Bay, S. How to overcome disorientation in mobile phone menus: A comparison of two different types of navigation Aids, Human Computer Interaction, 21, (2006), 393--432. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ziefle, M.; Arning, K. & Bay, S. Cross platform consistency and cognitive compatibility: the importance of users' mental model for the interaction with mobile devices. In K. Richter, J. Nichols, K. Gajos & A. Seffah (Eds.). CHI 2006 Workshop: The Many Faces of Consistency, MAFOC, 198, (2006) 75--81. http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-198/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Ziefle, M.; Bay, S. & Schwade, A. On keys meanings and modes. The impact of navigation key solutions on children's efficiency using a mobile phone. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(5), (2006), 413--434.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. How younger and older adults master the usage of hyperlinks in small screen devices

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
              April 2007
              1654 pages
              ISBN:9781595935939
              DOI:10.1145/1240624

              Copyright © 2007 ACM

              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]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 29 April 2007

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • Article

              Acceptance Rates

              CHI '07 Paper Acceptance Rate182of840submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader