MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970424779 · doi:10.1145/1838562.1838563

Multi-Layered Interfaces to Improve Older Adults’ Initial Learnability of Mobile Applications

2010· article· en· W1970424779 on OpenAlexaff
Rock Leung, Leah Findlater, Joanna McGrenere, Peter Graf, Justine Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearnabilityComputer scienceInterface (matter)Human–computer interactionMobile deviceSet (abstract data type)Task (project management)Layer (electronics)MultimediaUser interfaceMobile phoneWorld Wide WebOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile computing devices can offer older adults (ages 65+) support in their daily lives, but older adults often find such devices difficult to learn and use. One potential design approach to improve the learnability of mobile devices is a Multi-Layered (ML) interface, where novice users start with a reduced-functionality interface layer that only allows them to perform basic tasks, before progressing to a more complex interface layer when they are comfortable. We studied the effects of a ML interface on older adults’ performance in learning tasks on a mobile device. We conducted a controlled experiment with 16 older (ages 65--81) and 16 younger participants (age 21--36), who performed tasks on either a 2-layer or a nonlayered (control) address book application, implemented on a commercial smart phone. We found that the ML interface’s Reduced-Functionality layer, compared to the control’s Full-Functionality layer, better helped users to master a set of basic tasks and to retain that ability 30 minutes later. When users transitioned from the Reduced-Functionality to the Full-Functionality interface layer, their performance on the previously learned tasks was negatively affected, but no negative impact was found on learning new, advanced tasks. Overall, the ML interface provided greater benefit for older participants than for younger participants in terms of task completion time during initial learning, perceived complexity, and preference. We discuss how the ML interface approach is suitable for improving the learnability of mobile applications, particularly for older adults.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Accessible ComputingSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207