Evidence for an Elders' Advantage in the Naive Product Usability Judgments of Older and Younger Adults

Objective: To determine whose naive judgments of consumer product usability are more accurate---those of younger or older adults. Accuracy is here defined as judgments compatible with results from performance-based usability tests. Background: Older adults may be better able to predict usability problems than younger adults, making them particularly good participants in studies contributing to the user-centered design of products. This advantage, if present, may stem from older adults' motivation for more usable products or from their experience adapting their own environments to meet their changing physical, cognitive, and sensory needs. Method: Sixty older participants (ages 65-75 years) and 60 younger ones (ages 18-22 years) evaluated illustrations of consumer products on specific criteria (e.g., readability, learnability, or error rates). They either rated a single design for each product or ranked six alternative designs. They also explained their choices, indicated which features were most critical for usability, and selected usability-enhancing modifications. Results: Although there was no reliable age difference in the amount of usability information provided in the open-ended explanations, older adults were more accurate at ranking alternative designs, selecting the most usability-critical features, and selecting usability-enhancing modifications (all ps < .05). Conclusion: The usability judgments of older adults are more accurate than those of younger adults when these judgments are solicited in a fixed-alternative, but not open-ended, format. Application: Because older adults are more discerning about potential product usability problems, they may be particularly valuable as research participants in early-stage design research (prior to the availability of working prototypes).

[1]  Poulton Ec Searching for newspaper headlines printed in capitals or lower-case letters. , 1967 .

[2]  Demetrios Karis,et al.  Usability problem identification using both low- and high-fidelity prototypes , 1996, CHI.

[3]  John L. Horn,et al.  Major abilities and development in the adult period. , 1992 .

[4]  Arthur D. Fisk,et al.  Human Factors Goes to the Gridiron , 1995 .

[5]  Linda Williams Pickle,et al.  Cognitive Aspects of Statistical Mapping , 1997 .

[6]  Paul B. Baltes,et al.  Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences , 1990 .

[7]  C. Melody Carswell,et al.  How Knowledgeable are Salespeople About the Usability of Their Merchandise? , 2004 .

[8]  Donald G. MacKay,et al.  Language, memory, and aging: Distributed deficits and the structure of new-versus-old connections. , 1996 .

[9]  John W. Senders,et al.  Good vs. Bad Design , 1995 .

[10]  Lucy J. Beck,et al.  In Miscommunication and Human Error , 1995 .

[11]  L Hasher,et al.  Age and inhibition. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[12]  C. Melody Carswell,et al.  The Use of Older Adults on Preference Panels: Evidence From the Kentucky Interface Preference Inventory , 2000 .

[13]  B. G. Rule,et al.  Adult age differences in working memory. , 1989, Psychology and aging.

[14]  W. C. Shipley Shipley Institute of Living Scale , 1983 .

[15]  R. D. Ray,et al.  An analysis of domestic cooker control design : Ergonomics, Nov 1979, 22.11, 1243–1248 , 1980 .

[16]  Robert W. Bailey,et al.  Performance vs. Preference , 1993 .

[17]  M. Guarnera,et al.  Attention and aging , 2008, Aging clinical and experimental research.

[18]  Vernon S. Ellingstad,et al.  Using Sensor Lines to Show Control-Display Linkages on a Four Burner Stove , 1987 .

[19]  J. Jobe,et al.  Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods , 2003, Quality of Life Research.

[20]  Holly E. Hancock,et al.  Everyday Products: Easy to Use … or Not? , 2001 .

[21]  Carl Stevens,et al.  Enhancing the Accuracy of Customers' Product Usability Judgments: Lessons from Blind Evaluators , 2001 .

[22]  G. A. Kohl Human factors and behavioral science: Effects of shape and size of knobs on maximal hand-turning forces applied by females , 1983, The Bell System Technical Journal.

[23]  W. D. Ray,et al.  An analysis of domestic cooker control design , 1979 .

[24]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  When Users Want What's not Best for Them , 1995 .

[25]  Stephen J. Payne,et al.  Naive Judgments of Stimulus-Response Compatibility , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[26]  Rob Carter,et al.  Typographic Design: Form and Communication , 1985 .

[27]  Thomas R. G. Green,et al.  Organization and Learnability in Computer Languages , 1984, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[28]  E C Poulton,et al.  Searching for newspaper headlines printed in capitals or lower-case letters. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[29]  M. Powell Lawton,et al.  The psychology of adult development and aging , 1973 .

[30]  Arthur D. Fisk,et al.  Handbook of human factors and the older adult , 1997 .

[31]  M. Powell Lawton,et al.  Ecology and the aging process. , 1973 .

[32]  Robin Kinross,et al.  Designing Instructional Text , 1979 .

[33]  Alphonse Chapanis,et al.  A Reaction Time Study of Four Control-Display Linkages1 , 1959 .