The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Age-Related Differences in Movement Control: Adjusting Submovement Structure To Optimize Performance
Abstract
In this experiment older and younger adults were compared on their ability to position a cursor with an electromechanical mouse. Distance of the movement, size of the target, and relative emphasis on the speed or accuracy of the movement were manipulated. The study was designed to isolate and evaluate the effects of age-related differences in the noise-to-force ratio, perceptual feedback efficiency, strategy differences, and the ability to produce force as explanations for age-related differences in movement control. This was done by using two types of movement tasks and by analyzing movement performance according to stages of movement. The study showed that all four factors, when isolated, are significantly different for the two age groups. However, in the task component where all factors could simultaneously affect performance, the age-related difference in performance was less than the difference in either the measure of noise-to-force ratio or perceptual efficiency. Analysis of the submovement structure revealed how older adults compensated for the greater noise and less perceptual efficiency by adjusting the velocity and number of submovements. These findings are discussed in light of the optimized submovement model.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Possible implications of aging for interface designers
Hawthorn, D. (2000) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1016/s0953-5438(99)00021-1 · Cited by 475
Making computers easier for older adults to use: area cursors and sticky icons
Worden, A., Walker, N., Bharat, K., & Hudson, S. (1997) · Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems · doi:10.1145/258549.258724 · Cited by 376
Self-citationToward a Psychological Science of Advanced Technology Design for Older Adults
Rogers, W. A., & Fisk, A. D. (2010) · The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences · doi:10.1093/geronb/gbq065 · Cited by 204
Self-citationAge-related differences in performance with touchscreens compared to traditional mouse input
Findlater, L., Froehlich, J. E., Fattal, K., Wobbrock, J. O., & Dastyar, T. (2013) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2470703 · Cited by 172
Touch a Screen or Turn a Knob: Choosing the Best Device for the Job
Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., McLaughlin, A. C., & Pak, R. (2005) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/0018720054679452 · Cited by 141
Self-citationWord-processing training and retraining: effects of adult age, experience, and interface
Charness, N., Kelley, C. L., Bosman, E. A., & Mottram, M. (2001) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.16.1.110 · Cited by 145
A systematic approach to the development of research-based web design guidelines for older people
Zaphiris, P., Kurniawan, S., & Ghiawadwala, M. (2007) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-006-0054-8 · Cited by 119
Xie, B. (2007) · Educational Gerontology · doi:10.1080/03601270701252872 · Cited by 97
Enhanced area cursors: reducing fine pointing demands for people with motor impairments
Findlater, L., Jansen, A., Shinohara, K., Dixon, M., Kamb, P., Rakita, J., & Wobbrock, J. O. (2010) · Proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology · doi:10.1145/1866029.1866055 · Cited by 98
Review Study of Computer Input Devices and Older Users
Taveira, A. D., & Choi, S. D. (2009) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447310902865040 · Cited by 94
Light Pen Use and Practice Minimize Age and Hand Performance Differences in Pointing Tasks
Charness, N., Holley, P., Feddon, J., & Jastrzembski, T. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.3.373.50396 · Cited by 90
Jastrzembski, T. S., & Charness, N. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.13.4.224 · Cited by 83
Mouse movements of motion-impaired users: a submovement analysis
Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., & Clarkson, J. (2003) · Proceedings of the 6th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility · doi:10.1145/1028630.1028649 · Cited by 80
Goal Crossing with Mice and Trackballs for People with Motor Impairments
Wobbrock, J. O., & Gajos, K. Z. (2008) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/1361203.1361207 · Cited by 68
Gesture-Based Applications for Elderly People
Chen, W. (2013) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39330-3_20 · Cited by 34
Effects of Aging on Small Target Selection with Touch Input
Sultana, A., & Moffatt, K. (2019) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3300178 · Cited by 14
Wobbrock, J. O. (2014) · Advances in Medical Technologies and Clinical Practice · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4438-0.ch008 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Walker, N., Philbin, D. A., & Fisk, A. D.
- Venue
- The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1997-01-01
- Volume
- 52B
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- P40-P53
- ISSN
- 1079-5014 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-5368
- OpenAlex
- W2127937912
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
