Cited by 12Technology Use by Older AdultsTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourUsability and User Interface Design

Evaluate the Usability of the Mobile Instant Messaging Software in the Elderly

Wen Tzu-Ning, Cheng Po-Liang, Chang Po-Lun·2017·Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Abstract

Purpose: Instant messaging (IM) is one kind of online chat that provides real-time text transmission over the Internet. It becomes one of the popular communication tools. Even it is currnetly an era of smartphones, it still a great challenge to teach and promote the elderly to use smart phone. Besides, the acceptance of the elderly to use IM remains unknown. This study describes the usability and evaluates the acceptance of the IM in the elderly, who use the smartphone for the first time. This study is a quasi-experimental design study. The study period started from October, 2012 to December, 2013. There were totally 41 elderly recruited in the study. All of them were the first time to use LINE app on the smartphones. The usability was evaluated by using the Technology Acceptance Model which consisted of four constructs: cognitive usability, cognitive ease of use, attitude and willingness to use. Overall, the elderly had the best “attitude” for LINE APP communication software, with the highest rating averaging 4.07 points on four constructs, followed by an average of 4 points on “cognitive usefulness”. The socres of “cognitive ease of use” and “willingness to use” scores were equal which are an average score of 3.86. It can be interpreted that (1) the elders thought that the LINE APP as an excellent communication tool for them; (2) they found the software is useful (3) it was convenient for them to communicate. However, it was necessary to additionally assist and explain the certain functions such as the options. It would play a great role in the “willingness to use”. The positive acceptance of LINE APP in elderly refer to the probable similar acceptance for them to use other communication software. Encouraging the willingness the elderly to explore more technology products and understanding their behavior will be the basic knowledge to develop further software.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/978-1-61499-830-3-818

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tzu-Ning, W., Po-Liang, C., & Po-Lun, C.
Affiliations
National Yang Ming University (TW)
Venue
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
Publisher
IOS Press
Published
2017
Volume
245
Pages
818-822
ISSN
0926-9630 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2786264352
Cited by
12
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
8.66
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Studies in health technology and informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
instant messaging, older adults, smartphone use, usability, technology acceptance, technology acceptance model, willingness to use, attitudes toward technology
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Aged, Communication, Humans, Internet, Text Messaging, Mobile Applications

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