Does the research suggest that there are differences in younger and older users? What can we do to enable older adults to interact with our Web sites at the same level as younger adults?
It has been clear for the past 20 years, that the normal effects of aging include a decline in computer-related sensing, cognitive and responding abilities (Welford, 1981; Salthouse, 1991). These declines in the ability to sense, process information and respond can negatively affect older users' ability to perform many tasks.
A good example of aging influences on the senses is with hearing. As people age they require louder sounds to be able to hear adequately. Cohen (1994) had subjects listen to speech sounds and indicate the level they preferred for listening. The hearing comfort level by age was:
|Age in Years||Sound Level (dB)|
Not only do older users need louder sounds, but they also require larger letters. Charness and Dijkstra (1999) reported that older adults were slowed more than younger adults by smaller type fonts when reading prose text. They suggest that the best reading speeds can be attained with:
Ellis and Kurniawan (2000) proposed that the visual sensing limitations of older users could be better addressed if designers:
- Used only sans serif fonts (Arial, Helvetica, Verdana), and
- Used black type on a white background
Both Ellis and Kurniawan (2000) and Czaja (1997) recommend that designers should create links that:
As users age, there seems to be a general overall slowing of brain processing speed. The largest impact seems to be with tasks that require the most cognitive processing, such as with working memory, overall attentional capacity, and visual search performance. Age effects are smallest for tasks where knowledge is an important aspect of the task, and largest for tasks where successful performance is primarily dependent on speed (Sharit and Czaja, 1994).
Mead, Spaulding, Sit, Meyer and Walker (1997) had young (ages 19 to 36) and older (64 to 81) adults with little computer experience conduct searches using different Web sites The older users had the most problems with tasks that required 3 or more clicks. Older users also searched less efficiently than younger users, requiring them to make 81% more moves. Most of the difficulties encountered by older users seemed to be directly related to memory limitations.
Unfortunately, the participants in the above study had different computer experiences. The younger group used computers about once a week, while the older group used computers only about once a month.
Differences in test participants other than age has been a major problem with much of the early research in this area. One study (Mead and Fisk, 1997) reported that their group of young adults differed substantially from their group of older adults. Their young adults reliably:
Another major problem is the lack of consistency across studies when defining younger versus older users. For example, Charness and Dijkstra (1999) conducted three different studies where they defined older adults in three different ways (a) those over age 58, (b) those over 40, and (c) those over 50. Also, they reviewed the results of three other studies where older adults were defined as (a) those over 60, (b) those over age 50, and (c) a group "with an average age of 75."
As users age, their ability to make movements slows, and becomes less reliable. This causes them to type and mouse slower. Kalasky, et.al. (1999) attempted to determine if older users would be better off using highly practiced speaking for input. They and others (Morris and Brown, 1994) found that the time taken to read a text passage into the computer took reliably longer for older users than for younger users. In the study, the older users had an average speaking rate that was about 14% slower than younger users.
Designers need to find more ways to improve the performance of older adults without hindering the performance of younger adults. An excellent example was proposed by Aileen Worden, Neff Walker, Krishna Bharat and Scott Hudson at the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1997. They found a way to enhance cursor movement for older users (average age of 70.1 years) without degrading the performance of younger users (average age of 23.4).
These researchers created an "area cursor" and "sticky icons." Traditional cursors have a one-pixel "hot spot" which serves as the point of activation, whereas their "area cursor" was a 12x12 pixel square that had 144 hot spots. Their "sticky icons" enabled an automatic 30% reduction of the cursor’s gain ratio as the cursor neared a target, and then returned to normal after passing target. The area cursor and sticky icons had no effect on accuracy, but substantially improved the speed of performance over the traditional pointer for both young and old users:
Percent Improvement over Traditional Cursor
|Younger Users||Older Users||¬†|
|Sticky icons only||2%||27%|
|Area cursor only||19%||14%|
|Both sticky icons and area cursor||28%||57%|
Another interesting intervention was proposed by Intons-Peterson, et.al. (1998). They evaluated the effect of time-of-day preferences on user performance. They found that more younger people preferred the afternoon, and more older people preferred the morning. Using this preference data, they tested participants at optimal and non-optimal times. Both older and younger groups showed improved performance on a memory task when tested at their preferred time of day. Perhaps more importantly, when tested at preferred times, older adults showed memory effects similar to those of younger subjects.
Another intervention may be to train older users in ways that are most beneficial. Wiedenbeck and Zila (1997) evaluated different training methods with younger and older users. Older users benefited most from training that told them exactly how to accomplish an activity on certain tasks, and training that was more conceptual on other tasks. The researchers concluded that matching the training approach to specific tasks could allow older users to perform almost as well as younger users.
Charness, N. and Dijkstra, K. (1999), Age, luminance, and print legibility in homes, offices, and public places, Human Factors, 41(2), 173-193.
Coren, S. (1994), Most comfortable listening level as a function of age, Ergonomics, 37(7), 1269-1274.
Czaja, S.J. (1997), Computer technology and older adults, In M.E. Helander, T.K. Landauer and P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd Edition), New York: Elsevier, 797-812.
Ellis, R.D. and Kurniawan, S.H. (2000), Increasing the usability of online information for older users: A case study in participatory design, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12(2), 263-276.
Intons-Peterson, M.J., Rocchi, P., West, T., McLellan, K. and Hackney, A. (1998), Aging, optimal testing times, and negative priming, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(2), 362-376 (1998).
Kalasky, M.A., Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J. and Nair S.N. (1999), Is speech recognition technology robust enough for the older population? Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 725-727.
Mead, S.E. and Fisk, A.D. (1997), Effects of matching cognitive and perceptual-motor training to task components on complex task performance by older and younger adults, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 115-119.
Mead, SE, Spaulding, R.A., Sit, B.M. and Walker, N. (1997), Effects of age and training on World Wide Web navigation strategies, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 152-156.
Morris, R.J. and Brown, W.S. (1994), Age-related differences in speech variability among women, Journal of Communication Disorders, 27, 49-64.
Salthouse, T.A. (1991), Theoretical Perspectives on Cognitive Aging, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sharit, J. and Czaja, S.J. (1994), Ageing, computer-based task performance, and stress: Issues and challenges, Ergonomics, 37(4), 559-577.
Welford, A.T. (1981), Signal, noise, performance and age, Human Factors, 23, 97-109.
Wiedenbeck, S. and Zila, P.L. (1997), Hands-on Practice in Learning to Use Software: A Comparison of Exercise, Exploration, and Combined Formats, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 4(2), 169-196.
Worden, A., Walker, N., Bharat, K. and Hudson, S. (1997), Making computers easier for older adults to use: Area cursors and sticky icons, Proceedings of CHI '97, 266-271.
Sign up to get our Newsletter delivered straight to your inbox
HFI may use ‚Äúcookies‚ÄĚ or ‚Äúweb beacons‚ÄĚ to track how Users use the Website. A cookie is a piece of software that a web server can store on Users‚Äô PCs and use to identify Users should they visit the Website again. Users may adjust their web browser software if they do not wish to accept cookies. To withdraw your consent after accepting a cookie, delete the cookie from your computer.
HFI believes that every User should know how it utilizes the information collected from Users. The Website is not directed at children under 13 years of age, and HFI does not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children under 13 years of age online. Please note that the Website may contain links to other websites. These linked sites may not be operated or controlled by HFI. HFI is not responsible for the privacy practices of these or any other websites, and you access these websites entirely at your own risk. HFI recommends that you review the privacy practices of any other websites that you choose to visit.
HFI is based, and this website is hosted, in the United States of America. If User is from the European Union or other regions of the world with laws governing data collection and use that may differ from U.S. law and User is registering an account on the Website, visiting the Website, purchasing products or services from HFI or the Website, or otherwise using the Website, please note that any personally identifiable information that User provides to HFI will be transferred to the United States. Any such personally identifiable information provided will be processed and stored in the United States by HFI or a service provider acting on its behalf. By providing your personally identifiable information, User hereby specifically and expressly consents to such transfer and processing and the uses and disclosures set forth herein.
In the course of its business, HFI may perform expert reviews, usability testing, and other consulting work where personal privacy is a concern. HFI believes in the importance of protecting personal information, and may use measures to provide this protection, including, but not limited to, using consent forms for participants or ‚Äúdummy‚ÄĚ test data.
HFI may use personally identifiable information collected through the Website for the specific purposes for which the information was collected, to process purchases and sales of products or services offered via the Website if any, to contact Users regarding products and services offered by HFI, its parent, subsidiary and other related companies in order to otherwise to enhance Users‚Äô experience with HFI. HFI may also use information collected through the Website for research regarding the effectiveness of the Website and the business planning, marketing, advertising and sales efforts of HFI. HFI does not sell any User information under any circumstances.
HFI may disclose personally identifiable information collected from Users to its parent, subsidiary and other related companies to use the information for the purposes outlined above, as necessary to provide the services offered by HFI and to provide the Website itself, and for the specific purposes for which the information was collected. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information at the request of law enforcement or governmental agencies or in response to subpoenas, court orders or other legal process, to establish, protect or exercise HFI‚Äôs legal or other rights or to defend against a legal claim or as otherwise required or allowed by law. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information in order to protect the rights, property or safety of a User or any other person. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information to investigate or prevent a violation by User of any contractual or other relationship with HFI or the perpetration of any illegal or harmful activity. HFI may also disclose aggregate, anonymous data based on information collected from Users to investors and potential partners. Finally, HFI may disclose or transfer personally identifiable information collected from Users in connection with or in contemplation of a sale of its assets or business or a merger, consolidation or other reorganization of its business.
If a User includes such User‚Äôs personally identifiable information as part of the User posting to the Website, such information may be made available to any parties using the Website. HFI does not edit or otherwise remove such information from User information before it is posted on the Website. If a User does not wish to have such User‚Äôs personally identifiable information made available in this manner, such User must remove any such information before posting. HFI is not liable for any damages caused or incurred due to personally identifiable information made available in the foregoing manners. For example, a User posts on an HFI-administered forum would be considered Personal Information as provided by User and subject to the terms of this section.
Information about Users that is maintained on HFI‚Äôs systems or those of its service providers is protected using industry standard security measures. However, no security measures are perfect or impenetrable, and HFI cannot guarantee that the information submitted to, maintained on or transmitted from its systems will be completely secure. HFI is not responsible for the circumvention of any privacy settings or security measures relating to the Website by any Users or third parties.
Human Factors International, Inc.
PO Box 2020
1680 highway 1, STE 3600
Fairfield IA 52556
HFI reserves the right to cancel any course up to 14 (fourteen) days prior to the first day of the course. Registrants will be promptly notified and will receive a full refund or be transferred to the equivalent class of their choice within a 12-month period. HFI is not responsible for travel expenses or any costs that may be incurred as a result of cancellations.
$100 processing fee if cancelling within two weeks of course start date.
4 Pack + Exam registration: Rs. 10,000 per participant processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the course (4 Pack-CUA/CXA) registration before three weeks from the course start date. No refund or carry forward of the course fees if cancelling or transferring the course registration within three weeks before the course start date.
Individual Modules: Rs. 3,000 per participant ‚Äėper module‚Äô processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the course (any Individual HFI course) registration before three weeks from the course start date. No refund or carry forward of the course fees if cancelling or transferring the course registration within three weeks before the course start date.
Exam: Rs. 3,000 per participant processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the pre agreed CUA/CXA exam date before three weeks from the examination date. No refund or carry forward of the exam fees if requesting/cancelling or transferring the CUA/CXA exam within three weeks before the examination date.
There will be no audio or video recording allowed in class. Students who have any disability that might affect their performance in this class are encouraged to speak with the instructor at the beginning of the class.
The course and training materials and all other handouts provided by HFI during the course are published, copyrighted works proprietary and owned exclusively by HFI. The course participant does not acquire title nor ownership rights in any of these materials. Further the course participant agrees not to reproduce, modify, and/or convert to electronic format (i.e., softcopy) any of the materials received from or provided by HFI. The materials provided in the class are for the sole use of the class participant. HFI does not provide the materials in electronic format to the participants in public or onsite courses.