Cited by 58Technology Use by Older AdultsSocial Robot Interaction and HRIUsability and User Interface Design

Robot services for elderly with cognitive impairment: Testing usability of graphical user interfaces

Granata, C., Pino, M., Legouverneur, G., Vidal, J.-S., Bidaud, P., Rigaud, A.-S.·2013·Technology and Health Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Socially assistive robotics for elderly care is a growing field. However, although robotics has the potential to support elderly in daily tasks by offering specific services, the development of usable interfaces is still a challenge. Since several factors such as age or disease-related changes in perceptual or cognitive abilities and familiarity with computer technologies influence technology use they must be considered when designing interfaces for these users. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents findings from usability testing of two different services provided by a social assistive robot intended for elderly with cognitive impairment: a grocery shopping list and an agenda application. The main goal of this study is to identify the usability problems of the robot interface for target end-users as well as to isolate the human factors that affect the use of the technology by elderly. METHODS: Socio-demographic characteristics and computer experience were examined as factors that could have an influence on task performance. A group of 11 elderly persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment and a group of 11 cognitively healthy elderly individuals took part in this study. Performance measures (task completion time and number of errors) were collected. RESULTS: Cognitive profile, age and computer experience were found to impact task performance. Participants with cognitive impairment achieved the tasks committing more errors than cognitively healthy elderly. Instead younger participants and those with previous computer experience were faster at completing the tasks confirming previous findings in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The overall results suggested that interfaces and contents of the services assessed were usable by older adults with cognitive impairment. However, some usability problems were identified and should be addressed to better meet the needs and capacities of target end-users.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/thc-130718

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 58

Authors
Granata, C., Pino, M., Legouverneur, G., Vidal, J.-S., Bidaud, P., & Rigaud, A.-S.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
Venue
Technology and Health Care
Published
2013-06-01
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
217-231
ISSN
  • 0928-7329 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-7401
OpenAlex
W1793955052
Cited by
58
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2
FWCI
6.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Technology and Health Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
socially assistive robots, elderly care, mild cognitive impairment, usability, graphical user interface, age differences, computer experience, task performance, older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Ergonomics, Learning, Male, Paris, Robotics, Self-Help Devices, User-Computer Interface, Patient Satisfaction, Cognitive Dysfunction

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