Telepresence has the potential to assist older adults to stay socially connected and to access telehealth. Telepresence was initially created for office use, thus the usability of telepresence for older adults remains unknown and there is a lack of design recommendations, particularly those with an emphasis on users’ age-related needs and limitations. To bridge the gap, this study assessed two telepresence user interfaces (UIs). One UI was designed to mimic common features founds in commercially available telepresence systems. Another UI was designed based on design guidelines for older adults. Each UI was integrated to a virtual driving environment created via Unity. To assess the usability of both UIs, thirty older adults participated in usability testing. Questionnaires and semi-structured interview were administered following each UI test sessions. Results of this study provide insight on what usability features are critical for the aging population to use telepresence, such as high color contrast, automated controls, and consistent icons.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbdulrazakB. (2006). TeCaRob: Tele-Care using Telepresence and Robotic Technology for Assisting People with Special Needs. 7(3), 8.
2.
BangorA.KortumP. T.MillerJ. T. (2008). An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802205776
3.
BeerJ. M.TakayamaL. (2011). Mobile remote presence systems for older adults: Acceptance, benefits, and concerns. 8.
4.
BernardM.LiaoC. H.MillsM. (2001). The effects of font type and size on the legibility and reading time of online text by older adults. CHI ‘01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 175–176. https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634173
5.
BoissyP.BrièreS.CorriveauH.GrantA.LauriaM.MichaudF. (2011). Usability testing of a mobile robotic system for in-home telerehabilitation. 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 1839–1842. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090523
6.
BoyceP. R. (2012). Illumination. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (pp. 673–698). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118131350.ch24
7.
BrookeJ. (1996). SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. 8.
8.
CestaA.CortellessaG.OrlandiniA.TiberioL. (2013). Evaluating Telepresence Robots in the Field. In FilipeJ.FredA. (Eds.), Agents and Artificial Intelligence (pp. 433–448). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/9783-642-36907-0_29
9.
CochraneP.HeatleyD.CameronK. H. (1993). Telepresence-visual telecommunications into the next century (p. 180).
10.
CzajaS. J.BootW. R.CharnessN.RogersW. A. (2019). Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, Third Edition. CRC Press.
11.
DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
12.
DesaiM.TsuiK. M.YancoH. A.UhlikC. (2011). Essential features of telepresence robots. 2011 IEEE Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications, 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEPRA.2011.5753474
13.
FarageM. A.MillerK. W.AjayiF.HutchinsD. (2012). Design Principles to Accommodate Older Adults. Global Journal of Health Science, 4(2), p2. https://doi.org/10.5539/gjhs.v4n2p2
14.
FioriniL.MancioppiG.BecchimanziC.SorrentinoA.PistolesiM.TosiF.CavalloF. (2020). Multidimensional evaluation of telepresence robot: Results from a field trial*. 2020 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 1211–1216. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223467
15.
FrankJ. B. (2002). The Paradox of Aging in Place in Assisted Living. Greenwood Publishing Group.
GitlinL. N. (2003). Conducting Research on Home Environments: Lessons Learned and New Directions. The Gerontologist, 43(5), 628–637. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/43.5.628
18.
KoceskiS.KoceskaN. (2016). Evaluation of an Assistive Telepresence Robot for Elderly Healthcare. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(5), 121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0481-x
19.
KristofferssonA.CoradeschiS.LoutfiA. (2013). A Review of Mobile Robotic Telepresence. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2013, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/902316
20.
MatherM.JacobsenL. A.ArdK. M. P. (2015). Www.prb.org Population Bulletin. POPULATION BULLETIN, 23.
21.
McLellanS.MuddimerA.PeresS. C. (2012). The Effect of Experience on System Usability Scale Ratings. 7(2), 12.
22.
MitznerT. L.StuckR.HartleyJ. Q.BeerJ. M.RogersW. A. (2017). Acceptance of televideo technology by adults aging with a mobility impairment for health and wellness interventions. Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering, 4, 2055668317692755. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055668317692755
RemillardE. T.GriffithsP. C.MitznerT. L.SanfordJ. A.JonesB. D.RogersW. A. (2020). The TechSAge Minimum Battery: A multidimensional and holistic assessment of individuals aging with long-term disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 13(3), 100884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.100884
25.
RogersW. A.FiskA. D. (2010). Toward a Psychological Science of Advanced Technology Design for Older Adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 65B(6), 645–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbq065
26.
RogersY.SharpH.PreeceJ. (2011). Interaction Design: Beyond Human - Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons.
27.
RosenholtzR.TwarogN. R.Schinkel-BielefeldN.WattenbergM. (2009). An intuitive model of perceptual grouping for HCI design. Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 09, 1331. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518903
28.
SeelyeA. M.WildK. V.LarimerN.MaxwellS.KearnsP.KayeJ. A. (2012). Reactions to a Remote-Controlled Video-Communication Robot in Seniors’ Homes: A Pilot Study of Feasibility and Acceptance. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health, 18(10), 755–759. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2012.0026
29.
TsuiK. M.DalphondJ. M.BrooksD. J.MedvedevM. S.McCannE.AllspawJ.KontakD.YancoH. A. (2015). Accessible Human-Robot Interaction for Telepresence Robots: A Case Study. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2015-0001
30.
TsuiK. M.DesaiM.YancoH. A.CramerH.KemperN. (2011). Measuring Attitudes Towards Telepresence Robots. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT CONTROL AND SYSTEMS, 16, 11.
WuX.StuckR. E.MitznerT. L.RogersW. A.BeerJ. M. (2016). Televideo for older adults with mobility impairment: A needs assessment. Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA), 130.
33.
WuX.ThomasR. C.DrobinaE. C.MitznerT. L.BeerJ. M. (2017, September). Telepresence heuristic evaluation for adults aging with mobility impairment. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 16–20). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
