Mobile device interaction gestures for older users
Abstract
Finger gesture interaction on multitouch surfaces has become increasingly popular, especially on mobile devices. While manufacturers struggle to stake their claims in setting the next interaction standard, research still has to validate the 'intuitiveness' and 'naturalness' which is often attributed to this new interaction paradigm. Elderly users, who still struggle with interfaces that do not address their particular needs, abilities and knowledge, could especially benefit from a more intuitive and easy-to-use interface. This work addresses the question of which gestures might be appropriate for a range of common tasks on a generic mobile device for older users. Furthermore, we investigate whether the preferred gestures for a certain task differ between younger and older users. Results show that perceived suitability differs significantly on characteristics such as basic gesture type, fingers involved, or gesture complexity between the age groups.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In general, older adults were found to be slower than their younger counterparts in touch gestures but not more error-prone.
“In general, older adults were found to be slower than their younger counterparts in touch gestures but not more error-prone (Stößel and Blessing, 2010).”
From Intuitive Learnability of Touch Gestures for Technology-Naive Older Adults (2015) · cites this paper as Stößel and Blessing, 2010
Cites
The impact of aging on access to technology
Czaja, S. J., & Lee, C. C. (2007) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-006-0060-x · Cited by 560 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
“Maps are hard for me”: Identifying How Older Adults Struggle with Mobile Maps
Yu, J. E., & Chattopadhyay, D. (2020) · Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3373625.3416997 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Intuitive Learnability of Touch Gestures for Technology-Naive Older Adults
Mihajlov, M., Law, E. L.-C., & Springett, M. (2015) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1093/iwc/iwu044 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
- Authors
- Stößel, C., & Blessing, L.
- Affiliations
- Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
- University of Luxembourg (LU)
- ORCID
- Blessing, Lucienne
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-10-16
- Pages
- 793-796
- OpenAlex
- W1991514845
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4
- FWCI
- 1.22
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- finger gestures, multi-touch interaction, elderly users, mobile devices, age differences, intuitive interaction
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