Use of computer assistive technologies by older people with sight impairment: Perceived state of access and considerations for adoption

Abstract

This study explored the perceptions of sight-impaired older people about the use of specialist equipment designed for computer users with sight loss – whether it was meeting their needs and their views on the opportunities for equality in access to computer technologies. The study employed case study research methodology: conducting observations in an Internet café specifically established for people with sight loss and semi-structured interviews with 20 participants who had sight impairments between the ages of 60 and 87 years. A thematic analysis was carried out on transcribed qualitative interview data. Qualitative analysis employed the use of NVivo version 10 for both open and axial coding. Related coded categories were eventually merged into four themes. Findings suggest that stereotyping associated with the use of assistive technologies such as screen readers and concerns about access to mainstream technologies are important factors for understanding acceptance, willingness to adopt assistive technology, or continued use of assistive technologies by sight-impaired older people. Participants perceived advancements in technology as not fully considering their needs. In conclusion, the study highlights important points for technology developers to consider for inclusive designs or cost-effective assistive technologies as social stigma remains a neglected construct for understanding acceptance, willingness to adopt assistive technology, or continued use of assistive technologies among sight-imapired older people.

Keywords

Assistive technology computer use disabilities older people sight impairment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agarwal

Prasad

J. A.

(1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30, 361–391.

Age UK. (2013). Internet use among older people subject to North/South divide. Retrieved from https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/2013/09/17/internet-use-amongst-older-people-subject-to-north-south-divide

Anderson

(2016). Design websites for Blind/Visually Impaired (Web Accessibility Issues For Blind People). Retrieved from http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/design-website-for-blind/

Arch

(2008, May 14). Web accessibility for older users: A literature review. W3C. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-age-literature/

Bagozzi

R. P.

Davis

F. D.

Warshaw

P. R.

(1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, 45, 660–686.

Best

Butler

(2012). Disability and communication: A consideration of cross-disability communication and technology. Disability Studies Quarterly, 32(4), 1–16.

Bilbao-Osorio

Soumitra

Lan

(2014). The global information technology report 2014: Rewards and risks of big data. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.

Bryman

(2008). Social research methods (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

10.

Carlson

Ehrlich

(2006). Sources of payment for assistive technology: Findings from a national survey of persons with disabilities. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 18, 77–86.

11.

Cazini

Frasson

A. C.

(2013). Voice project: Technological innovations in social inclusion of people with visual impairment. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 8(1), 18–24.

12.

Coleman

Gibson

Hanson

Bobowicsz

McKay

(2010). Engaging the disengaged: How do we design technology for digitally excluded older adults? In Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on designing interactive systems (pp. 175–178). Aarhus, Denmark: ACM.

13.

Compeau

Higgins

C. A.

(1995). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6, 118–143.

14.

Craven

(2003). Access to electronic resources by visually impaired people. Information Research, 8. Retrieved from www.informationr.net/ir/8-4/paper156.html

15.

Creswell

J. W.

(2007). Qualitative enquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). London, England: SAGE.

16.

Czaja

S. J.

Charness

Fisk

A. D.

Hertzog

Nair

S. N.

Rogers

W. A.

(2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Aging, 21, 333–352.

17.

Davis

F. D.

(1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Science Quarterly, 13, 319–340.

18.

Dickenson

Gregor

(2006). Computer use has no demonstrated impact on the well-being of older adults. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64, 744–753.

19.

Dickinson

Hill

R. L.

(2007). Keeping in touch: Talking to older people about computers and communication. Educational Gerontology, 33, 613–630.

20.

Docampo Rama

. (2001). Technology generations handling complex user interfaces (PhD thesis). Eindhoven, The Netherlands: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.

21.

Dovidio

J. F.

Pagotto

Michelle

R. H.

(2011). Implicit attitudes and discrimination against people with physical disabilities. Disability and Aging Discrimination, 2, 157–183.

22.

Eastman

J. K.

Iyer

(2004). The elderly’s uses and attitudes towards the Internet. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21, 208–220.

23.

Ellis

E. R.

Allaire

A. J.

(1999). Modelling computer interest in older adults: The role of age, education, computer knowledge, and computer anxiety. Human Factors, 41, 345–355.

24.

Ellis

Kent

(2011). Disability and new media. New York, NY: Routledge.

25.

Ferguson

(2014, November 11–13). Global science and technology talent and sustainable entrepreneurship: University’s human resource roles for science cities/science parks. Proceedings of the UNESCO-WTA International Training Workshop, Daejeon, Korea.

26.

Fiske

Cuddy

Glick

(2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.

27.

Fraser

S. A.

Kenyon

Lagacé

Wittich

Southall

K. E.

(2016). Stereotypes associated with age-related conditions and assistive device use in Canadian media. The Gerontologist, 6, 1023–1032.

28.

Gaffney

(2010). An exploration of the stigma associated with the use of assistive devices. Journal of Sociology, 3, 67–78.

29.

Gallagher

B. A. M.

Murphy

Fennell

(2012). Ageing, vision impairment and digital inclusion in Ireland. The Journal of Community Informatics, 8, 1712–1744.

30.

Gell

N. M.

Rosenberg

D. E.

Demiris

LaCroix

A. Z.

Patel

K. V.

(2015). Patterns of technology use among older adults with and without disabilities. The Gerontologist, 55, 412–421.

31.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.

32.

Hersh

M. A.

(2013). Deafblind people, stigma and the use of communication and mobility assistive devices. Technology and Disability, 25, 245–261.

33.

Hillen

B. L.

Barker

F. M.

Lawrence

M. G.

Gagliano

(2012). Harnessing the power of information technologies for the visually impaired. Federal Practitioner, 29, 16.

34.

Hollier

(2007). The disability divide: A study into the impact of computing and internet-related technologies on people who are blind or visually impaired. GLADNET Collection Paper. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/gladnetcollect/340/

35.

Juznic

Blazic

Mercun

Plestenjak

(2006). Who says that old dogs cannot learn new tricks? A survey of internet/web usage among seniors. New Library World, 107, 332–345.

36.

C. S.

Liu

(2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless Internet. Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 13, 206–222.

37.

Manyika

Chui

Brown

Bughin

Dobbs

Roxburgh

(2011). Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. New York, NY: McKinsey Global Institute.

38.

Mattila

Karjaluoto

Pento

(2003). Internet banking adoption among mature customers: Early majority or laggards? Journal of Services Marketing, 17, 514–528.

39.

Mayhorn

C. B.

Stronge

A. J.

McLaughlin

A. C.

Rogers

W. A.

(2004). Older adults, computer training, and the systems approach: A formula for success. Educational Gerontology, 30, 185–203.

40.

Melenhorst

Rogers

Bouwhuis

(2006). Older adults motivated choice for technological innovation: Evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psychology and Aging, 12, 190–195.

41.

Moggridge

(2007). Designing interactions. Cambridge: MIT Press.

42.

Morrell

Mayhorn

Echt

(2004). Why older adults use or do not use the internet. In Burdick

Kwon

(Eds.), Gerotechnology: Research and practice in technology and aging (pp. 71–85). New York, NY: Springer.

43.

Niehaves

Plattfault

(2014). Internet adoption by the elderly: Employing IS technology acceptance theories for understanding the age-related digital divide. European Journal of Information Systems, 23, 708–726.

44.

NVivo. (2010). NVivo qualitative data analysis software, version 10. QSR International Ltd. Doncaster, Victoria, Australia.

45.

ONS. (2013). Office of national statistics report: Over 7 million adults in the UK have NEVER used the internet, with a third of elderly people missing out. Retrieved from https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/itandinternetindustry/bulletins/internetusers/2017

46.

Parette

Scherer

(2004). Assistive technology use and Stigma. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 217–226.

47.

Phillimore

Goodson

(2004). Qualitative research approach. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 9(2), 1–12.

48.

Polit

D. F.

Beck

C. T.

(2004). Nursing research: Principles and methods (7th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

49.

Rekkedal

A. M.

(2012). Assistive hearing technologies among students with hearing impairment: Factors that promote satisfaction. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8, 1–19.

50.

Rogers

W. A.

Meyer

Walker

Fisk

A. D.

(1998). Functional limitations to daily living tasks in the aged: A focus group analysis. Human Factors, 40, 111–125.

51.

Ryu

Kim

Lee

(2009). Understanding the factors affecting online elderly’s participation in video UCC services. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25, 619–632.

52.

Sandler

R. L.

(2012). Value sensitive design and nanotechnology. In Scott

Francis

(Eds.), Debating science: Deliberation, values and the common good (pp. 205–225). Amherst, NY: Humanities Books.

53.

Sayago

Sloan

Blat

(2013). Everyday use of computer-mediated communication tools and its evolution over time: An ethnographical study with older people. Interacting with Computers, 23, 543–554.

54.

Scambler

(2009). Health-related Stigma. Sociology of Health and Illness, 31, 441–445.

55.

Seidman

(1998). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

56.

Selwyn

Gorard

Furlong

Madden

(2003). The information aged: Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing and Society, 23, 561–582.

57.

Sharit

Czaja

S. J.

Perdomo

Lee

C. C.

(2004). A cost–benefit analysis methodology for assessing product adoption by older user populations. Applied Ergonomics, 35, 81–92.

58.

Shimomura

Hvannberg

E. T.

Hafsteinsson

(2010). Accessibility of audio and tactile interfaces for young blind people performing everyday tasks. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9, 297–310.

59.

Shinohara

Wobbrock

J. O.

(2011, May 7–12). In the shadow of misperception: Assistive technology use and social interaction. Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

60.

Sloan

Atkinson

M. T.

Machin

C. H. C.

(2010, April 26–27). The potential of adaptive interfaces as an accessibility aid for older web users. Proceedings of 2010 International Cross-disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A), Raleigh, NC, USA.

61.

Sodestrom

Ytterhus

(2010). The use and non-use of assistive technologies from the world of information and communication technology by visually impaired young people: A walk on the tightrope of peer inclusion. Disability & Society, 23, 303–315.

62.

Southall

Wittich

(2012). Barriers to low vision rehabilitation: A qualitative approach. Journal of Vision Impairment & Blindness, 106, 261–274.

63.

Strauss

Corbin

(1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

64.

Tsatsou

Higgs

Fry

Berry

Stafford

(2011). ICT use and connectivity of minority communities in Wales. Online. Retrieved from: http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/documents/project-reports-and-reviews/connected-communities/ict-use-and-connectivity-of-minority-communities-in-wales/

65.

Turner

J. B.

Turner

R. J.

(2013). Social relations, social integration, and social support. In Aneshensel

C. S.

(Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of mental health: Handbooks of sociology and social research (pp. 341–356). London, England: SAGE.

66.

Umemuro

(2004). Computer attitude, cognitive abilities, and technology among older Japanese adults. Gerontology, 3, 64–76.

67.

Venkatesh

Davis

F. D.

(1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451–481.

68.

Vicente

M. R.

Lopez

A. J.

(2010). A multi-dimensional analysis of the disability divide: Some Evidence for Internet use. The Information Society, 26, 48–64.

69.

Wagner

Hassanein

Head

(2010). Computer use by older adults: A multi-disciplinary review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 870–882.

70.

Williamson

Wright

Schauder

Bow

(2001). The internet for the blind and visually impaired. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 6, 1–16.