The effect of previous exposure to technology on acceptance and its importance in usability and accessibility engineering

Abstract

In Usability and Accessibility Engineering, metric standards are vital. However, the development of a set of reciprocal metrics-which can serve as an extension of, and supplement to, current standards-becomes indispensable when the specific needs of end-user groups, such as the elderly and people with disabilities, are concerned. While ISO 9126 remains critical to the usability of a product, the needs of the elderly population are forcing the integration of other factors. Familiarity and recognisability are not relevant to someone with no experience and therefore no referent; however, acceptance becomes a major factor in their willingness to learn something new and this acceptance requires trust based on association. Readability and legibility are of less relevance to a blind person than to someone with failing eyesight. This paper describes some usability metrics ascertained on the basis of experiments made with applications for elderly people throughout the summer term of 2007. The factors that influence the older users' acceptance of software, including the extent of their previous exposure to technology, are evaluated in order to provide short guidelines for software developers on how to design and develop software for the elderly. The evaluation of the expectations, behavior, abilities, and limitations of prospective end-users is considered of primary importance for the development of technology. A total of N = 31 participants (22 women/9 men) took part in various tests. The participants' ages ranged from 49 to 96 years with an average age of 79. Five of the tests were designed for a PDA or cellular phone, one test was designed for a laptop PC. Of the total of 55 tests, 52 tests provided sufficient data to evaluate the results. In 23 of the tests, all tasks were completed. As a main outcome, it can be experimentally proved that the acceptance is related to a factor, which is this paper is called PET (Previous Exposure to Technology). This is discussed in light of the aforementioned metrics.Most usability engineering is qualitative: we observe how end users use an application, what they like and what they hate, and if it is really bad we want to change it … if the developers have time [33].

Touchscreen mobile devices and older adults: a usability study

“…Nevertheless, it is important to consider that older adults have expressed their interest in using modern devices however, feel that modern technology is not suitably designed for their abilities (Goddard & Nicolle, 2012). Holzinger, Searle & Wernbacher (2011) described some usability metrics ascertained on the basis of experiments made with applications for elderly people throughout the summer term of 2007. The factors that influence the older users' acceptance of software, including the extent of their previous exposure to technology, were evaluated in order to provide short guidelines for software developers on how to design and develop software for the elderly.…”

Using Smartphones to Assist People with Down Syndrome in Their Labour Training and Integration: A Case Study

“…Even if they had not any previous experience with them before, learning how to use them would be advantageous, since these devices will become useful in some moment of their lives. Besides, Holzinger et al [7] discussed the acceptance of technology and the tolerance of individuals to introduce a new device in their routine. A person with cognitive disability, yet having been trained in its use, will not use the device in his/her real life if there is no total acceptance of it.…”

Performance on the traditional and the touch screen, tablet versions of the Corsi Block and the Tower of Hanoi tasks

“…However, interestingly users' subjective ratings suggest that they preferred the paper format (Holzinger, Searle, Wernbacher, 2011). This indicated that even when information displayed digitally is processed as effectively as information on a computer screen, non-computerized versions can still be preferred.…”