Julia Himmelsbach
ABSTRACT
In this work, we identify influencing factors on modality choices of older adults. In detail, we investigated when and why older adults prefer speech over touch interaction and vice versa when interacting with a mobile multimodal health and wellbeing service. We conducted a study with 19 older adults using a mobile application with a duration of three to six weeks. Due to this long duration of the study we were able to gain highly external valid insights as our results are based on real world experiences. We identify additional influencing factors within the areas of user characteristics, contextual factors and perceived system characteristics. We outline the impact of the factors and highlight the importance of several of these factors to enable accessible user interfaces. Our results provide first steps towards a more holistic model of modality choices taking into account interdependencies of different factors.
- Bilici, V., Krahmer, E., Riele, S., and Veldhuis, R. 2000. Preferred modalities in dialogue systems. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP '00), 727--730.Google Scholar
- Cox, A. L., Cairns, P. A., Walton, A. and Lee, S. 2008. Tlk or txt? Using voice input for SMS composition. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 12, 8: 567--588. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D'Andrea, A., D'Ulizia, A. Ferri, F. and Grifoni, P. 2009. A multimodal pervasive framework for ambient assisted living. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA '09), Article 39, 8 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dumas, B., Lalanne, D., Oviatt, S. 2009. Multimodal interfaces: A survey of principles, models and frameworks. Human Machine Interaction 5440: 3--26. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Flanagan, J. C. 1954. The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological bulletin 5, 4), 327--358.Google Scholar
- Ghosh, S. and Joshi, A. 2013. Exploration of multimodal input interaction based on goals. In Proceedings of the 11th Asia Pacific Conference on Computer Human Interaction (APCHI '13), 83--92. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hedicke, V. 2000. Multimodalität in Mensch-Maschine-Schnittstellen. In Mensch-Maschine-Systemtechnik, Timpe, K. P., Jürgensohn, T. and Kolrep (Eds.) Symposion Publishing, Düsseldorf, Germany, 203--230.Google Scholar
- Jian, C., Shi, H., Sasse, N., Rachuy, C., Schafmeister, F., Schmidt, H. and von Steinbüchel, N. 2014. Modality Preference in Multimodal Interaction for Elderly Persons. In Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies, 6th International Joint Conference, BIOSTEC '13, Barcelona, Spain, February 11-14, 2013, Revised Selected Papers, 452, 378--393.Google Scholar
- Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A. A. 2004. A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science 306, 5702: 1776--1780.Google Scholar
- Kamvar, M. and Beeferman, D. 2010. Say what? Why users choose to speak their web queries. In Proceedings of 11th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech '10), 1966--1969.Google Scholar
- Lemmelä, S., Vetek, A., Mäkelä, K. and Trendafilov, D. 2008. Designing and evaluating multimodal interaction for mobile contexts. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '08), 265--272. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mayring, P.2014. Qualitative Content Analysis. Theoretical Foundation, Basic Procedures and Software Solution. Retrieved October, 2014 from Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR): http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173.Google Scholar
- Naumann, A. N., Wechsung, I, Möller, S. 2008. Factors Influencing Modality Choice in Multimodal Applications. Perception in Multimodal Dialogue Systems. 4th IEEE Tutorial and Research Workshop on Perception and Interactive Technologies for Speech-Based Systems, PIT 2008, Kloster Irsee, Germany, June 16-18, 2008. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5078, 37--43. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Oviatt, S. L. 1999. Ten myths of multimodal interaction. Communications of the ACM 42, 11: 576--583. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rudnicky, A. I. 1993. Mode preference in a simple data-retrieval task. In Proceedings of the workshop on Human Language Technology (HLT '93), 364--369. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schaffer, S., Schleicher, R. and Möller, S. 2015. Modeling input modality choice in mobile graphical and speech interfaces. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 75: 21--34. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scheibelhofer, E. 2008. Combining Narration-Based Interviews with Topical Interviews: Methodological Reflections on Research Practices. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11, 5: 403--416.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schlögl, S., Garschall, M. and Tscheligi, M. 2014. Designing Natural Language User Interfaces with Elderly Users. Workshop on Designing Speech and Language Interactions at the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14).Google Scholar
- Schüssel, F., Honold, F. and Michael W. 2013. Influencing factors on multimodal interaction during selection tasks. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 7, 4: 200--310.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Suhm, B., Myers, B. and Waibel, A. 1999. Model-based and empirical evaluation of multimodal interactive error correction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '99), 584--591. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wasinger R. and Krüger, A. 2006. Modality preferences in mobile and instrumented environments. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces (IUI '06), 336--338. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wechsung, I. 2014. An Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Interaction. Determining Quality Aspects and Modality Choice. Springer International Publishing. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wechsung, I., Engelbrecht, K.-P., Kühnel, C., Möller, S. and Weiss, B.2012. Measuring the Quality of Service and Quality of Experience of multimodal human-machine interaction. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 6, 1-2: 73--85.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Witzel, A. 2000. The Problem-Centered Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1, 1: Retrieved October, 2014 from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1132/2521Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Enabling accessibility through multimodality?: interaction modality choices of older adults
Recommendations
Mobile multimodal interaction for older and younger users: exploring differences and similarities
MUM '17: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous MultimediaSince they can integrate a wide range of interactive modalities, multimodal interfaces are considered to improve accessibility for a variety of users, including older adults. However, only few works have actually explored how older adults approach ...
Effects of Multimodal Feedback on the Usability of Mobile Diet Diary for Older Adults
UAHCI '09: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Part III: Applications and ServicesGlobally, overweight is an increasing problem and this especially the case for older adults, facing physical challenges and who need to maintain a healthy diet. eHealth services, such as a digital diet diary could support them. Consequently, we designed ...
Polite or Direct? Conversation Design of a Smart Display for Older Adults Based on Politeness Theory
CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsConversational interfaces increasingly rely on human-like dialogue to offer a natural experience. However, relying on dialogue involving multiple exchanges for even simple tasks can overburden users, particularly older adults. In this paper, we explored ...
Comments