Design of an Interactive Exercise and Leisure System for the Elderly Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Motion-Sensing Technology
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Research Background and Motivation
1.1.1. Research Background
1.1.2. Research Motivation
1.2. Literature Review
1.2.1. Needs of Aging for the Elderly
1.2.2. Exercise and Leisure Activities for the Elderly
1.2.3. Orange Technology and Applications
1.2.4. AI and Computer Vision Technology
1.3. Research Goal and Process
1.3.1. System Design Concepts
- (1)
- Selecting appropriate leisure and entertainment themes for the elderly and using situational simulations to foster a sense of connection to reality during device use.
- (2)
- Designing YOLO algorithm-based recognition techniques for the human–machine interface and integrating Kinect-based skeletal recognition schemes, enabling the system to detect body movements and allowing participants to interact naturally.
- (3)
- Designing motion-based interactions that provide an intuitive mode of engagement, reducing operational difficulty and minimizing the burden on the elderly.
- (4)
- Designing appropriate game interactions to enhance the elderly’s cognitive awareness of life and physical activity, thereby improving their physiological functions through entertainment.
1.3.2. Research Goal
- (1)
- What are the advantages of integrating AI technologies into exercise and leisure activities for the elderly?
- (2)
- How can target detection and computer vision technologies be incorporated into exercise and leisure activities for the elderly?
- (3)
- How can AI technologies be used to enhance the positive effects of exercise and leisure activities for the elderly?
- (1)
- The application of AI technologies in human–machine interaction and their forms of expression will be explored.
- (2)
- The correlation between exercise and leisure activities and the lives of the elderly will be examined, and a system prototype will be constructed.
- (3)
- Current AI applications and cases in the field of leisure and entertainment will be investigated, and system design concepts will be summarized.
- (4)
- According to the literature review on the relation between leisure activities and the elderly, an interactive system will be proposed for the elderly using AI technologies.
- (5)
- Through surveys and user interviews, the usability and effect of the developed system will be explored.
1.3.3. Research Process
- (1)
- Stage I: decision of research content—The research goal and the selection of research methods for this study are determined based on a literature review conducted from four perspectives: (1) the needs of the elderly in aging, (2) leisure activities for the elderly, (3) orange technology for health and care, and (4) AI and computer vision.
- (2)
- Stage II: system development—The design concepts of the proposed system are derived from the reviewed literature. Then, a prototype system is constructed accordingly.
- (3)
- Stage III: Field Test—The prototype system is tested at a care center, where the elderly are invited to experience the system. Their opinions about using the system are collected by questionnaires and interviews.
- (4)
- Stage IV: Opinion Analysis—The users’ opinions are analyzed statistically using the SPSS and AMOS packages, and conclusions are drawn with suggestions for future research also provided.
2. Methods
2.1. Prototype Development
- (1)
- Requirement analysis: Through a literature review, the issues faced by the elderly in leisure activities today are identified. The AI technology and the YOLO algorithm are explored, and the applications of them to leisure activities for the elderly are summarized, culminating in the formulation of the design principles for the system.
- (2)
- Prototype design: Based on the derived design concepts, the desired interactive exercise and leisure system for the elderly is designed, with an interactive flowchart being created to illustrate the system’s interaction process.
- (3)
- Prototype development: The integration of the motion-sensing technique and the YOLO algorithm are conducted for use in the proposed system for the elderly.
- (4)
- Prototype evaluation: A user experience activity is held to evaluate the system’s effectiveness. Public demonstrations, questionnaire surveys, and user interviews are carried out to analyze the users’ feedback and assess the system’s performance.
2.2. Questionnaire Survey
- (1)
- Survey time: After a participant experiences the interactive exercise and leisure system, they are invited to complete a questionnaire, which takes approximately 5 min.
- (2)
- Survey participants: Questionnaires will be distributed anonymously to all elderly participants. Each participant’s experience process will last about 10 min, followed by 5 min for completing the questionnaire.
- (3)
- Survey implementation steps: (i) Explain the questionnaire items to the participant. (ii) Distribute a questionnaire to each participant. (iii) Request the participant to fill out the questionnaire.
- (1)
- System usability evaluation: The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the elderly’s acceptance of technology integration in leisure activities, as well as the usability of the system proposed in this study across various aspects. The questionnaire design is primarily based on the TAM [60], with modifications made to suit the specific characteristics of this study. The questionnaire consists of 12 questions, labeled T1 to T12, as shown in Table 4.
- (2)
- User experience evaluation: The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the users’ experience and feelings after interacting with the system proposed in this study. The questionnaire design is primarily based on the SEMs [61], with modifications made to suit the specific characteristics of this study. The questionnaire consists of 20 questions, labeled S1 to S20, as shown in Table 5.
2.3. Interviews with Participants
3. Results
3.1. System Design
3.1.1. The Design Concept
- (1)
- Elastic Ball Exercise Experience: This exercise, based on the elderly person’s past experiences and entertainment activities, is designed to engage their visual and auditory perception as well as hand strength. The participant holds an elastic ball and follows the system’s instructions to perform four actions. The YOLO algorithm detects whether the ball is in the participant’s hand, and if it moves out of range, a prompt appears to ask them to pick it up again for an optimal experience. The process is illustrated in Figure 4.
- (2)
- Tennis Exercise Experience: Based on the elderly person’s background, this exercise uses hand and leg muscles to operate the device, aiming to activate visual and auditory perception, as well as leg strength. The participant holds a tennis racket and follows system instructions to swing and hit the ball. The YOLO algorithm detects in real time whether the racket is in the participant’s hand and tracks its orientation. The racket must face the camera; if it is sideways or out of range, a prompt appears on the TV screen to ask the user to reposition the racket for the best experience. The tennis exercise process is shown in Figure 5.
3.1.2. The Interactive Process
3.1.3. System Architecture
3.1.4. Main Technologies
- (A)
- Motion-based Interaction Detection
- (1)
- Body skeleton recognition and tracking
- (2)
- Limb movement recognition
- (B)
- Computer Vision and Object Detection
- (1)
- Setting up training images
- (2)
- Model training
- (3)
- Integrating the object detection process
3.2. Experimental Design
3.3. Analysis of Questionnaire Survey Results
3.3.1. Sample Structure Analysis
3.3.2. Analysis of Reliability and Validity of Questionnaire Survey Results
- (A)
- Step 1: Verification of the adequacy of the questionnaire dataset
- (B)
- Step 2: Finding the latent dimensions of the questions from the collected data
- (C)
- Step 3: Verifying the reliability of the collected questionnaire data
- (D)
- Step 4: Verification of applicability of the structural model established with the dimensions
- (E)
- Step 5: Verification of the validity of the collected questionnaire data
3.3.3. Analysis of Questionnaire Data About the Scale of System Usability
- (A)
- Data analysis for the latent dimension of “perceived ease of use”
- (1)
- The average scores for T10, T11, and T12 range from 4.66 to 4.71 with 100% agreement, indicating the system is easy to operate and interactive.
- (2)
- T9 has an average score of 4.71 and a 99.2% agreement rate, suggesting the interface design meets user needs, though further optimization is recommended.
- (3)
- T7 and T8 received 98.4% agreement, with some users requesting additional learning support, suggesting the inclusion of tutorials or more application scenarios.
- (B)
- Data analysis for the latent dimension of “perceived usefulness”
- (1)
- T3, T4, and T5 scored above 4.70, with T5 scoring the highest at 4.80, indicating significant improvement in hand–foot movement and coordination.
- (2)
- T1 and T6 received scores of 4.75 and 4.76, with a 99.2% agreement rate, showing strong recognition of the system’s health benefits and acceptance of continued use.
- (3)
- T2 received a 100% agreement rate, reflecting unanimous satisfaction with the system’s ability to make recreational exercise easier and more enjoyable.
- (4)
- T4 had a slightly lower agreement rate of 97.6%, suggesting that enhancing foot movement and adding health data tracking could improve the user experience.
3.3.4. Analysis of Questionnaire Data About the Scale of User Experience
- (A)
- Data analysis for the latent dimension of “sensation and emotion”
- (1)
- The average scores for all items of this latent dimension ranged from 4.68 to 4.84, with over 98% of participants agreeing, indicating positive evaluations of visual, auditory, and emotional responses.
- (2)
- S19 received the highest score of 4.84, reflecting the participants’ strong agreement on the system’s entertainment value and interactive appeal, while S20 scored 4.79, indicating the system’s success in motivating the participants to explore technology used in exercise and leisure activities.
- (3)
- S7 and S3 scored 4.73 and 4.72, respectively, confirming the key role of audiovisual feedback in sustaining the engagement and enhancing participation of the elderly users.
- (B)
- Data analysis for the latent dimension of “action and connection”
- (1)
- S14 and S15, both with an average score of 4.80 and a 100% agreement rate, indicate strong social propagation effects and participants’ strong intentions to recommend and share the system.
- (2)
- S16, with the highest average score of 4.81 and a 100% agreement rate, reflects participants’ very high willingness to reuse the system and their clear intention to continue using it.
- (3)
- S17, with an average score of 4.77, and S18, with an average score of 4.83, were highly rated, demonstrating that the system effectively motivates participants to engage in more beneficial activities, enhancing their motivation for leisure, entertainment, and health.
- (4)
- S12, with an average score of 4.77 and a 98.4% agreement rate, shows that participants recognize the system’s role in enhancing their perception of leisure entertainment and its value.
- (C)
- Data analysis for the latent dimension of “cognition and technology awareness”
- (1)
- S10, with an average score of 4.70, and S11, with an average score of 4.71, received high ratings and over 96% agreement, indicating that the system effectively enhances participants’ understanding of and attitudes toward technology, improving their awareness.
- (2)
- S9, with an average score of 4.71, shows that participants developed a higher acceptance of and willingness to explore technology, highlighting the system’s potential to inspire engagement with new technologies.
- (3)
- S8 received the highest average score of 4.81, with a 99.2% agreement rate, reflecting strong recognition of the tech–entertainment combination. Additionally, S1 scored 4.72, suggesting the system’s high appeal and entertainment value based on participants’ perceptions.
3.4. Analysis of Results of Interviews with Participants
3.4.1. Record of User Interviews
3.4.2. Summary of Interview Results
- (1)
- System Interface is easy to understand and operate—Participants found the interface clear and intuitive, with most reporting smooth learning and operation, although some initially faced difficulties.
- (2)
- The interaction schemes are innovative, promoting physical health—The novel, body movement-based interaction effectively trained physical functions while fostering emotional connections, increasing happiness and engagement.
- (3)
- The exhibition and design of the proposed system received high praise—The exhibition layout and digital content were engaging and suitable for elderly users, with friendly staff and enjoyable game content enhancing the experience.
- (4)
- AI Technology enhances interaction and willingness to participate—AI technology made activities more interactive and interesting, sparking interest and openness to new technologies, and encouraging eagerness for future activities.
- (5)
- Future development suggestions are proposed—Future development suggestions are proposed: Participants expressed a desire for more frequent activities to benefit their health and entertainment and suggested diversifying content and gameplay to better meet their needs.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
4.1. Discussion
- (1)
- The interactive system was found to provide positive emotional experiences, such as happiness and joy, for the elderly.
- (2)
- The system’s gameplay was considered novel and easy to engage with, making it interesting and attractive to elderly users.
- (3)
- The elderly expressed a positive attitude toward the integration of AI, indicating good acceptance of AI-based leisure systems.
- (4)
- The system was believed to enhance physical activity and hand–eye coordination.
- (5)
- The elderly were able to easily understand the system’s interaction methods, reflecting a positive experience.
- (6)
- The system’s usability and ease of use averaged above 4.48 on a 1-to-5 scale, showing it is well suited for elderly users.
- (1)
- Several sports were tested during the system design process, and ultimately, ball manipulation games and racket-based tennis were selected for their ease of play and suitability for elderly users.
- (2)
- Elderly users prefer ball games over tennis because the simpler and symmetrical shape of the ball makes it easier to detect by the YOLO algorithm, whereas the racket in tennis adds complexity.
- (3)
- The use of the real-time, versatile AI algorithm YOLO lowers the difficulty threshold, making it easier for elderly users to progress through the games, thereby increasing their willingness to engage with the system.
- (4)
- These AI-driven, easy-to-play games, combined with media prompts, enhance elderly users’ interest in continuous gameplay, effectively achieving the system’s goal of improving their physical health.
4.2. Concluding Remarks
- (1)
- AI technology enhances interactive leisure experiences for the elderly—An interactive exercise and leisure system for the elderly was designed in this study, and elderly users were fascinated by its motion-sensing technology. It was found through user interviews that the system was considered novel and enjoyable by the elderly.
- (2)
- The proposed interactive system promotes elderly health and well-being—Positive feedback was given by the majority of elderly participants in the survey and interviews. The system’s interface was found to be smooth and enjoyable, and improvements in hand–eye coordination and cognitive abilities were reported, contributing to a healthy, active lifestyle.
- (3)
- Aligning the system with familiar experiences boosts acceptance—The system was designed to enhance physical functions of the elderly while providing entertainment. Familiar elements, such as elastic ball and tennis exercises, were incorporated, and higher acceptance and engagement were reported, making the system more attractive than traditional leisure activities and encouraging continued use.
4.3. Suggestions for Future Research
- (1)
- The movements required could be simpler and clearer—The motion-sensing system might benefit from prioritizing simple postures and ergonomic design, considering elderly users’ physical abilities. Additional guidance, such as animation and audio, could be helpful for operation explanations.
- (2)
- The difficulty of object recognition may need further consideration—The YOLO algorithm struggles with irregular objects, like the side angle of a tennis ball. To improve recognition, users could interact with objects like the racket from a frontal position, and the design could consider the algorithm’s limitations to enhance interaction diversity.
- (3)
- Additional visual and auditory feedback could enhance the system—To improve user experience, more visual and auditory feedback might be added. Additionally, introducing multiplayer modes (cooperative or competitive) could further enrich the interaction.
- (4)
- The system could be expanded to other elderly leisure environments—The system could be extended to other elderly environments (e.g., community centers, parks, rehabilitation centers), with adjustments for specific functions, creating a modular system that adapts to different settings.
- (5)
- Other applications and studies may also be conducted—The proposed system can be adapted to meet the needs of individuals in recovery and those with disabilities, with adjustments in game content and interaction style to provide new health benefits; the sample size can be expanded as much as possible to improve the representativeness and statistical power of the research results; the case of multi-day system uses may be studied to support additionally the statement of positive impact on the health; and finally, the system usability, which might change over time with prolonged use, may be investigated.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- World Health Organization. WHOQOL: Measuring Quality of Life; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1997.
- Lin, Y.Y.; Huang, C.S. Aging in Taiwan: Building a Society for Active Aging and Aging in Place. Gerontologist 2016, 56, gnv107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, H.H.; Liao, Y.H.; Hsu, C. Using Artificial Intelligence to Achieve Health Promotion for the Elderly by Utilizing the Power of Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2023 5th International Electronics Communication Conference (IECC), Osaka City, Japan, 21–23 July 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, F. Outlook on the Elderly Service Industry and Public Service Policies under the Development of an Aging Society. Public Gov. Q. 2016, 4, 21–32. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- National Health Bureau. Elderly Health Promotion Plan (2009–2012). 2009. Available online: https://www.hpa.gov.tw/EngPages/Index.aspx (accessed on 19 January 2025).
- Crews, D.E.; Zavotka, S. Aging, disability, and frailty: Implications for universal design. J. Physiol. Anthropol. 2006, 25, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Chen, Z.Y. A Study on the Technology Acceptance of the Elderly: A Case Study of the Southern Region. Kunshan Univ. J. 2015, 10, 132–144. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Li, C.F. A Study on Product Design for Elderly Users. J. Des. 2006, 11, 65–79. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xu, H.J. Successful Aging: A Positive Perspective on Elderly Health. Community Dev. Q. 2003, 103, 252–260. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Rowe, J.W.; Kahn, R.L. Successful aging. Gerontologist 1997, 37, 433–440. [Google Scholar]
- Baltes, P.B.; Baltes, M.M. Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. Aging Hum. Dev. 1990, 30, 1–34. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, L.H. A Study on Successful Aging of Elderly Learners in Taiwan. Demogr. Res. 2006, 33, 133–170. [Google Scholar]
- Franklin, N.C.; Tate, C.A. Lifestyle and successful aging: An overview. Am. J. Style Med. 2009, 3, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Callaghan, P. Exercise: A neglected intervention in mental health care? J. Psychiatr. Ment. Health Nurs. 2004, 11, 476–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crowther, M.R.; Parker, M.W.; Achenbaum, W.A.; Larimore, W.L.; Koenig, H.G. Rowe and Kahn’s model of successful aging revisited: Positive spirituality—The forgotten factor. Gerontologist 2002, 42, 613–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, X.M.; Gao, M.H. An Exploration of the Relationship Between Elderly Leisure Activity Participation and Successful Aging. Shu-Te Online Stud. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2014, 10, 97–122. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Heintzman, P.; Mannell, R.C. Spiritual functions of leisure and spiritual well-being: Coping with time pressure. Leis. Sci. 2003, 25, 207–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, T.W.; Kuo, N.C. A Study on the Leisure Education Model for the Elderly. Chia Nan Univ. J. 2012, 38, 629–646. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hsieh, C.F. Are You Getting Old?—Discussing “Successful Aging”. Health News KMUH 2009, 29, 11. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Gasiorek, J.; Fowler, C.; Giles, H. What does successful aging sound like? Profiling communication about aging. Hum. Commun. Res. 2015, 41, 577–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsuo, M.; Nagasawa, J.; Yoshino, A.; Hiramatsu, K.; Kurashiki, K. Effects of activity participation of the elderly on quality of life. Yonago Acta Med. 2003, 46, 17–24. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, G.Y. The Change of Leisure Participation Among Older People in Taiwan: Cause and Impact. Master’s Thesis, Department of Sociology, National Chengchi University, Taipei City, Taiwan, 2008. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Hughes, K. The Future of Cloud-Based Entertainment. Proc. IEEE 2012, 100, 1391–1394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lian, J.M. The Importance of Leisure Products for the Elderly. Master’s Thesis, Center for Aging and Welfare Technology, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Hollinworth, N.; Hwang, F. Investigating familiar interactions to help older adults learn computer applications more easily. Comput. Educ. 2011, 56, 123–130. [Google Scholar]
- Caprani, N.; O’Connor, N.E.; Gurrin, C. Touch Screens for the Older User. In Assistive Technologies; Auat Cheein, F.A., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, D.; Triyason, T.; Funikul, S. Smart homes and quality of life for the elderly: A systematic review. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM), Taichung, Taiwan, 11–13 December 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.F. The origin and development of Orange Technology. Sci. Dev. 2011, 466, 6–9. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.F. The Development and Challenges of Orange Technology. Sci-Tech Vista, 5 July 2011. Available online: https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/Article/c000003/detail?ID=4fb34922-2590-4f7e-bd25-3ba55243cb28 (accessed on 21 January 2025). (In Chinese)
- Liu, C.J.; Kao, S.F. A Study on the Importance of Employee Well-Being Programs Using the Orange Concept. J. Bus. Manag. 2013, 97, 61–86. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.F. When Orange Technology Meets Green Technology: Towards a Happier Technological Life. NCKU Mag. 2013, 237, 66–71. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liu, C.J.; Chen, W.C. A Study on the Importance of Applying Orange Technology to Cloud Services. J. Eng. Technol. Educ. 2014, 11, 159–173. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Chen, W.L. A Study on the Application of Orange Technology in the Design Strategy of Smart Preventive Devices. Shu-Te Univ. J. Technol. 2019, 21, 49–61. [Google Scholar]
- Industrial Development Bureau, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Taiwan Current Status of the Smart Vehicle Industry. Available online: https://www.sipo.org.tw/industry-overview/industry-state-quo/smart-home-industry-state-quo.html (accessed on 21 January 2025).
- Xu, Y.L.; Bai, L. Forward-looking Development Suggestions for the Application of Smart Technology in the Lives and Care of the Elderly. J. Welfare Technol. Serv. Manag. 2018, 6, 325–338. [Google Scholar]
- Sharkey, A.; Sharkey, N. Granny and the Robots: Ethical Issues in Robot Care for the Elderly. Ethics Inf. Technol. 2012, 14, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
- Groove X. LOVOT. Available online: https://lovot.life/en/ (accessed on 24 March 2020).
- Temi. Temi—The Personal Robot. Available online: https://www.robotemi.com/ (accessed on 24 March 2020).
- SmartAll. SmartAll: The First AI Butler for Everyone. Available online: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1977486391/smartall-the-first-ai-butler-for-everyone?token=dd9d5d1b (accessed on 24 March 2020).
- Zhang, C.; Lu, Y. Study on Artificial Intelligence: The State of the Art and Future Prospects. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2021, 23, 100224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turing, A.M. On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 1936, 2, 230–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCulloch, W.S.; Pitts, W. A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 1943, 5, 115–133. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Y.; Li, X.; Luo, H.; Yin, S.; Kaynak, O. Quo Vadis Artificial Intelligence? Discover Artif. Intell. 2022, 2, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Felzenszwalb, P.; McAllester, D.; Ramanan, D. A Discriminatively Trained, Multiscale, Deformable Part Model. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Anchorage, AK, USA, 23–28 June 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Girshick, R.; Donahue, J.; Darrell, T.; Malik, J. Rich Feature Hierarchies for Accurate Object Detection and Semantic Segmentation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2014, 36, 1727–1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.-Y.; Liao, H.-Y.M. YOLOv1 to YOLOv10: The Fastest and Most Accurate Real-time Object Detection Systems. APSIPA Trans. Signal Inf. Process. 2024, 13, e29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Redmon, J.; Divvala, S.; Girshick, R.; Farhadi, A. You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 779–788. [Google Scholar]
- Sun, Y.-H.; Chen, R.-W.; Wu, J.-X. Application of Fall Detection System for Elderly Companion (Published on Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 5 July 2019). Available online: https://ictjournal.itri.org.tw/Content/Messagess/contents.aspx?MmmID=654304432061644411&MSID=1036010412420573512 (accessed on 21 January 2025).
- Lu, K.L.; Chu, E.T.H. An Image-Based Fall Detection System for the Elderly. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, C.; Chang, S.; Chao, H.; Huang, Y. Detection of Cognitive Injured Body Region Using Multiple Triaxial Accelerometers for Elderly Falling. IEEE Sens. J. 2011, 11, 763–770. [Google Scholar]
- Su, B.Y.; Ho, K.C.; Rantz, M.J.; Skubic, M. Doppler Radar Fall Activity Detection Using the Wavelet Transform. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2015, 62, 865–875. [Google Scholar]
- Agrawal, S.C.; Tripathi, R.K.; Jalal, A.S. Human-Fall Detection from an Indoor Video Surveillance. In Proceedings of the 2017 8th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), Delhi, India, 3–5 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Moment Factory. Interactive Basketball Court. Moment Factory, 2019. Available online: https://momentfactory.com/work/all/all/interactive-basketball-court (accessed on 2 June 2020).
- TeamLab. Continuous Life and Death at the Crossover of Eternity. TeamLab, 2020. Available online: https://www.teamlab.art/zh-hant/w/continuous_life_and_death_crossover/ (accessed on 19 January 2025).
- TeamLab. Worlds Unleashed and then Connecting. TeamLab, 2015. Available online: https://www.teamlab.art/zh-hant/w/worlds-unleashed/ (accessed on 19 January 2025).
- Chi, Y.-P.; Guo, H.-C. System Analysis and Design; Huatai Cultural Enterprise Co., Ltd.: Taipei, Taiwan, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Connell, J.L.; Shafer, L.B. Structured Rapid Prototyping: An Evolutionary Approach to Software Development; Yourdon Press: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Eliason, A.L. System Development: Analysis, Design, and Implementation; Harper Collins Publishers: Port Everglades, FL, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Ye, Z.C.; Ye, L.C. Research Methods and Thesis Writing; Shangding Digital Publishing Co., Ltd.: Taipei, Taiwan, 2011; pp. 72–106. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results; Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Schmitt, B.H. Experiential Marketing: How to Get Customers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, and Relate to Your Company and Brands; The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Likert, R. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 1932, 140, 5–55. [Google Scholar]
- Flick, U. An Introduction to Qualitative Research, 6th ed.; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, J.-D.; Yen, J.-F.; Chen, M.-H. Qualitative Research Methods: Analysis of Interview Mode and Implementation Steps. J. Disabil. Res. 2005, 3, 122–136. [Google Scholar]
- IBM. KMO and Bartlett’s Test. Available online: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spss-statistics/28.0.0?topic=detection-kmo-bartletts-test (accessed on 10 May 2023).
- Trochim, W.M.K.; Hosted by Conjointly. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Available online: https://conjointly.com/kb/theory-of-reliability/ (accessed on 10 May 2023).
- Taber, K.S. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018, 48, 1273–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guilford, J.P. Psychometric Methods, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1954. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar]
Title | Human–Machine Interfacing | AI Technique | Interaction Scheme |
---|---|---|---|
LOVOT [37] | Robot | Deep Learning | Developing a unique personality through the user’s touches and interactions. |
Temi-The Personal Robot [38] | Robot | Machine Learning | Performing autonomous navigation and adjusting screen angles based on the user’s need. |
SmartAll: The First AI Butler for Everyone [39] | Smart Butler | Machine Learning | Recording user behavior through algorithms and reacts accordingly. |
DPM | R-CNN | YOLO | |
---|---|---|---|
Detection Scheme | Sliding window | Selective search | Full image detection |
Detection Accuracy | High | High | Lower |
Detection Speed | Slow | Slow | Fast |
Generalization | High | Lower | Highest |
Title | Presentation Form | Technique Used | Interaction Scheme |
---|---|---|---|
Interactive Basketball Court [53] | Interactive Space | Target detection, tracking, and real-time computing | The camera captures the player’s movements and projects them in sync with the player’s actions. |
Continuous Life and Death at the Crossover of Eternity [54] | Interactive Wall | Target tracking and real-time computing | The flowers on the wall bloom through computer processing and change based on the visitor’s actions. |
Worlds Unleashed and then Connecting [55] | Interactive Table | Target detection, tracking, and image recognition | When tableware is placed on the table, it interacts and connects with the projected table surface. |
Label | Question |
---|---|
T1 | Using this interactive system helps improve my physical health. |
T2 | During the experience, it made my leisure exercise easier. |
T3 | During the experience, it enhanced my hand movements. |
T4 | During the experience, it enhanced my leg movements. |
T5 | During the experience, it improved the coordination between my eyes, hands, and feet. |
T6 | I am willing to continue using the interactive system. |
T7 | Learning to use the interactive system was easy for me. |
T8 | I found that the interactive system made leisure exercise simpler for me. |
T9 | I think the interface of the interactive system is easy to understand. |
T10 | Operating the interactive system did not require much mental effort. |
T11 | I think the operation of the interactive system is very intuitive. |
T12 | The interaction while operating the interactive system was very smooth. |
Label | Question |
---|---|
S1 | During the experience, the overall interaction was very engaging for me. |
S2 | During the experience, it made me feel a sense of friendliness. |
S3 | During the experience, it brought me a great visual experience. |
S4 | During the experience, the music gave me a pleasant feeling. |
S5 | During the experience, it enhanced my interest in leisure and entertainment. |
S6 | During the experience, the interaction energized me. |
S7 | During the experience, the audiovisual feedback attracted me to continue using it. |
S8 | During the experience, I felt the entertainment aspect of technology. |
S9 | After the experience, I became more willing to try technology. |
S10 | After the experience, I gained a better understanding of the uses of technology. |
S11 | After the experience, it changed my perception of interactive systems. |
S12 | After the experience, I understood the importance of leisure and entertainment. |
S13 | I would recommend this interactive system to my friends. |
S14 | When my friends ask, I will recommend this interactive system. |
S15 | I would share this experience with my friends. |
S16 | If given the chance, I would experience this interactive system again |
S17 | The interactive system has motivated me to engage in leisure activities. |
S18 | The interactive system strengthened the connection between leisure activities and physical health. |
S19 | It showed me how body movements can create leisure experiences with the interactive system. |
S20 | The design of the interactive system made me more willing to engage with technology. |
Step No. | Stage | Interaction Description | Label | Game Interface |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Standby | 1. When there is no user present, the system will play an idle animation. | 1. | |
2 | Select Game | 2. Users can initiate the game by a T-pose and select a desired item (“elastic ball” or “tennis racket”). | 2. | |
3 | Elastic Ball Sports Experience | 3.1 The user is required to perform four different actions according to the instructions: (3.1a) Lift the ball overhead; (3.1b) Pass the ball under the legs; (3.1c) Switch hands over the head; (3.1d) Push the ball in front of the chest. After performing each action five times, the user is required to proceed to the next action. | (3.1a) | |
(3.1b) | ||||
(3.1c) | ||||
(3.1d) | ||||
3.2 If the user is not holding the ball, the system will display a prompt asking them to pick up the ball. The prompt disappears as the system detects the ball again. | 3.2 | |||
3.3 If the user does not perform the correct action within 5 s, the system will still consider the action completed. As all actions are completed, the ending screen will appear. | 3.3 | |||
4 | Tennis Sports Experience | 4.1 The user must hit the ball back to the opposite side of the court as many times as possible within a one minute to score points. | 4.1 | |
4.2 If the racket leaves the screen or the user is not holding it, a prompt will appear, asking the user to pick it up. The prompt disappears once the system detects the racket again. | 4.2 | |||
4.3 If the user does not perform the correct swing within 10 s, the system will count it as complete, and the ending screen will appear once all actions are performed. | 4.3 |
Software (Version Number) | Hardware | |
---|---|---|
|
|
|
Label | Function | Algorithm |
---|---|---|
G0 | Recognizing limb movements based on the detected target joint points according to specific conditions | Input: Depth images and limb movement recognition conditions received by Kinect. Output: Completed limb movement event. Method: Step 1: Use Kinect to detect the user’s limb movements. Step 2: If the user’s limb movements meet the pre-set conditions, proceed to Step 3. Step 3: Output the limb movement event. |
Label | Limb Recognition Event | Illustration | Limb Recognition Condition |
---|---|---|---|
G1 | Place both hands in front of the chest | Place both hands approximately 10 cm in front of the chest. | |
Raise both hands high | Raise both hands above the head by at least 20 cm. | ||
G2 | Place the right hand in front of the right leg | Place the right hand 5 cm in front of the right leg. | |
Raise the right leg | Raise the right leg more than 10 cm and move the right hand underneath the right leg. | ||
Place the left hand in front of the left leg | Place the left hand 5 cm in front of the left leg. | ||
Raise the left leg | Raise the left leg more than 10 cm and move the left hand underneath the left leg. | ||
G3 | Extend both hands horizontally | Extend both hands horizontally at shoulder height, forming a “T” shape, with each hand 20 cm away from the shoulder. | |
Raise both hands high | Raise both hands above the head by at least 20 cm. | ||
G4 | Place both hands in front of the chest | Place both hands approximately 10 cm in front of the chest. | |
Extend both hands forward | Extend both hands straight out in front, at least 30 cm beyond the chest. | ||
G5 | Pull the right hand back | Pull the right hand back, at least 15 cm away from the right shoulder, to prepare for a swing. | |
Swing the right hand forward | Swing the right hand forward, keeping it at least 20 cm away from the shoulder. | ||
Bring the right hand to the left shoulder | Pull the right hand back to a position 10 cm away from the left shoulder. |
Label | Function | Algorithm |
---|---|---|
C1 | Maintain the T-shape pose and trigger the button event to enter the game selection page. | Input: Depth images and T-pose recognition count TC, all received by Kinect. Output: Entering the game selection page. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is performing the T-pose until it is completed. Step 2: If the TC is smaller than 3, increment TC by 1 and proceed to Step 3; otherwise, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If the T-pose is continuously detected every 0.5 s, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: Cancel the detected T-pose, and reset TC to zero. Step 5: When TC is greater than or equal to 3, trigger the button event to enter the game selection page. |
C2 | Maintain the holding object posture with both hands and trigger the button event to enter the elastic ball experience or tennis racket experience. | Input: Depth images and the number HC of times the user performs the two-handed holding object gesture, all received by Kinect. Output: Triggering the button event to enter the interactive experience page. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is maintaining the two-handed holding object gesture until it is completed. Step 2: If HC is smaller than 3, increment HC by 1 and proceed to Step 3; if HC is greater than or equal to 3, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If the two-handed holding object gesture is continuously detected every 0.5 s, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: Cancel the two-handed holding object gesture, reset HC to zero. Step 5: When HC is greater than or equal to 3, trigger the button event to enter the interactive experience page. |
C3-1 | Elastic Ball Experience: “Raise the Ball” Motion Detection. | Input: Depth images and the number HUC of times the user raises both hands, all received by Kinect. Output: Proceeding with the “Raise the Ball” motion command. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is raising both hands to hold the ball until it is completed. Step 2: If HUC is less than 5, proceed to Step 3; if HUC is greater than or equal to 5, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If both hands are raised at least 20 cm above the head, increment HUC by 1 and increase the progress bar by 1, then return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: If both hands are not raised at least 20 cm above the head, HUC does not increase. Step 5: When HUC is greater than or equal to 5, proceed to the “Underhand Ball Rotation” experience. |
C3-2 | Elastic Ball Experience: “Underhand Ball Rotation” Motion Detection. | Input: Depth images, the number RLC of times the right leg is raised, and the number LLC of times the left leg is raised, all received by Kinect. Output: Proceed with the “Underhand Ball Rotation” motion command. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is performing the “Underhand Ball Rotation” motion until it is completed. Step 2: If RLC and LLC are both less than 5, proceed to Step 3; if both RLC and LLC are greater than or equal to 5, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If the right leg is raised at least 10 cm, increment RLC by 1; if the left leg is raised at least 10 cm, increment LLC by 1, and increase the progress bar by 1. Then, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: If the right leg is raised less than 10 cm, RLC does not increase. If the left leg is raised less than 10 cm, LLC does not increase. Step 5: When both RLC and LLC are greater than or equal to 5, proceed to the “Hand Swap Overhead” experience. |
C3-3 | Elastic Ball Experience: “Hand Swap Overhead” Motion Detection. | Input: Depth images, the number RHC of times the right hand is raised horizontally, the number LHC of times the left hand is raised horizontally, and the number BHC of times both hands are raised above the head, all received by Kinect. Output: Proceed with the “Hand Swap Overhead” motion command. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is performing the “Hand Swap Overhead” motion until it is completed. Step 2: If RHC, LHC, and BHC are all less than 5, proceed to Step 3; if any of RHC, LHC, or BHC are greater than or equal to 5, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If both hands are raised horizontally at least 20 cm from the shoulders, increment RHC and LHC by 1; if both hands are raised above the head by at least 20 cm, increment BHC by 1, and increase the progress bar by 1. Then, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: If the hands are not raised at least 20 cm horizontally from the shoulders, RHC and LHC do not increase. If both hands are not raised at least 20 cm above the head, BHC does not increase. Step 5: When RHC, LHC, and BHC are all greater than or equal to 5, proceed to the “Push the Ball in Front” experience. |
C3-4 | Elastic Ball Experience: “Push the Ball in Front” Motion Detection. | Input: Depth images and the number HFC of times both hands are pushed forward, all received by Kinect. Output: Proceed with the “Push the Ball Forward” motion command. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is pushing both hands forward until it is completed. Step 2: If HFC is less than 5, proceed to Step 3; if HFC is greater than or equal to 5, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If both hands are pushed at least 30 cm forward from the chest, increment HFC by 1 and increase the progress bar by 1. Then, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: If both hands are not pushed at least 30 cm from the chest, HFC does not increase. Step 5: When HFC is greater than or equal to 5, proceed to the score calculation screen. |
C4 | Tennis Experience: “Swing Pose” Motion Detection. | Input: Depth images and the position RHP of the right-hand joint received by Kinect. Output: Swing motion command. Method: Step 1: Detect the user’s right-hand position. Step 2: If RHP is at least 15 cm behind the right shoulder, enter the swing preparation posture animation, then proceed to Step 3. Step 3: If RHP is at least 20 cm to the right of the shoulder, enter the swing posture animation, then proceed to Step 4. Step 4: If RHP is at least 5 cm to the left of the left shoulder, enter the follow-through posture animation, then proceed to Step 5. Step 5: Complete one full swing motion. |
C5 | Maintain the T-shape pose and trigger the button event to return to the home page. | Input: Depth images and the number EPC of times the T-pose body gesture is detected, all received by Kinect. Output: Command to return to the home page. Method: Step 1: Detect if the user is performing the T-pose body gesture until it is completed Step 2: If EPC is less than 3, increment EPC by 1 and proceed to Step 3; if EPC is greater than or equal to 3, proceed to Step 5. Step 3: If the T-pose body gesture is continuously detected every 0.5 s, return to Step 2; otherwise, proceed to Step 4. Step 4: Cancel the T-pose body gesture and reset EPC to zero. Step 5: When EPC is greater than or equal to 3, trigger the button event to return to the home page. |
Label | Function | Algorithm |
---|---|---|
R1 | Detect the item held by the user and enter the game corresponding to that item | Input: Real-time video captured by the webcam. Output: Identify the object held by the user. Method: Step 1: Capture the user and surrounding environment using the webcam. Step 2: Perform grid segmentation on the captured image. Step 3: Compare and predict each grid with the trained model. Step 4: Select the target that most closely matches the prediction. Step 5: Based on the detection results, enter the elastic ball experience or tennis experience. |
R2 | Detect whether the elastic ball stays on the screen | Input: Real-time video captured by the webcam, elastic ball. Output: Prompt for the disappearance of the target. Method: Step 1: Capture the user and surrounding environment using the webcam. Step 2: Perform grid segmentation on the captured image. Step 3: Compare and predict each grid with the trained elastic ball model. Step 4: Analyze whether the elastic ball is visible in the frame. Step 5: If the elastic ball is not detected for over 5 s, the system will display a prompt asking the user to pick up the elastic ball. |
R3 | Detect whether the tennis racket stays on the screen | Input: Real-time video captured by the webcam, tennis racket. Output: Prompt for the disappearance of the target. Method: Step 1: Capture the user and surrounding environment using the webcam. Step 2: Perform grid segmentation on the captured image Step 3: Compare and predict each grid with the trained tennis racket model. Step 4: Analyze whether the elastic ball is visible in the frame. Step 5: If the tennis racket is not detected for over 5 s, the system will display a prompt asking the user to pick up the tennis racket. |
Basic Data | Category | No. of Samples | Ratio (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Sex | Male | 25 | 20.2 |
Female | 99 | 79.8 | |
Age | 55–64 | 16 | 12.9 |
65–74 | 47 | 37.9 | |
75–84 | 47 | 37.9 | |
85 and above | 14 | 11.3 | |
Having used interactive motion-sensing systems in the past | Yes | 27 | 21.8 |
No | 97 | 78.2 |
No. | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | ||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A + B) | |||||
T1 | 3 | 5 | 4.75 | 0.453 | 75.8 | 23.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
T2 | 4 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.459 | 70.2 | 29.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T3 | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.457 | 79.0 | 19.4 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
T4 | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.496 | 75.8 | 21.8 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
T5 | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
T6 | 3 | 5 | 4.76 | 0.449 | 76.6 | 22.6 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
T7 | 3 | 5 | 4.58 | 0.527 | 59.7 | 38.7 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
T8 | 3 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.494 | 71.8 | 26.6 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
T9 | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.473 | 71.8 | 27.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
T10 | 4 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.456 | 71.0 | 29.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T11 | 4 | 5 | 4.66 | 0.475 | 66.1 | 33.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T12 | 4 | 5 | 4.69 | 0.463 | 69.4 | 30.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
No. | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | ||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A + B) | |||||
S1 | 3 | 5 | 4.72 | 0.503 | 74.2 | 23.4 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
S2 | 3 | 5 | 4.68 | 0.486 | 68.5 | 30.6 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S3 | 3 | 5 | 4.72 | 0.487 | 73.4 | 25.0 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S4 | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.444 | 77.4 | 21.8 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
S5 | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S6 | 4 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.425 | 76.6 | 23.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S7 | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.483 | 74.2 | 24.2 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S8 | 3 | 5 | 4.81 | 0.417 | 81.5 | 17.7 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
S9 | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.522 | 74.2 | 22.6 | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | 96.8 |
S10 | 3 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.525 | 73.4 | 23.4 | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | 96.8 |
S11 | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.506 | 73.4 | 24.2 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
S12 | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.462 | 78.2 | 20.2 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S13 | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.479 | 75.0 | 23.4 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S14 | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S15 | 4 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.403 | 79.8 | 20.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S16 | 4 | 5 | 4.81 | 0.397 | 80.6 | 19.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S17 | 4 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.425 | 76.6 | 23.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S18 | 4 | 5 | 4.83 | 0.377 | 83.1 | 16.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S19 | 4 | 5 | 4.84 | 0.369 | 83.9 | 16.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S20 | 3 | 5 | 4.79 | 0.428 | 79.8 | 19.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
Scale | Name of Measure or Test | Value | |
---|---|---|---|
System usability | KMO measure of sampling adequacy | 0.892 | |
Bartlett test of sphericity | Approx. Chi-Square | 818.326 | |
Degree of freedom | 66 | ||
Significance | 0.000 | ||
User experience | KMO measure of sampling adequacy | 0.912 | |
Bartlett test of sphericity | Approx. Chi-Square | 1884.97 | |
Degree of freedom | 190 | ||
Significance | 0.000 |
Question Dimension (Scale) | ||
---|---|---|
No. | 1 | 2 |
T10 | 0.813 | 0.282 |
T11 | 0.764 | 0.285 |
T12 | 0.757 | 0.275 |
T7 | 0.741 | 0.136 |
T9 | 0.741 | 0.398 |
T8 | 0.658 | 0.385 |
T3 | 0.257 | 0.810 |
T5 | 0.258 | 0.800 |
T4 | 0.132 | 0.732 |
T1 | 0.366 | 0.666 |
T2 | 0.330 | 0.633 |
T6 | 0.418 | 0.577 |
Question Dimension (Scale) | |||
---|---|---|---|
No. | 1 | 2 | 3 |
S6 | 0.723 | 0.189 | 0.276 |
S19 | 0.714 | 0.420 | 0.092 |
S7 | 0.713 | 0.289 | 0.332 |
S2 | 0.681 | 0.287 | 0.379 |
S20 | 0.669 | 0.470 | 0.174 |
S4 | 0.638 | 0.317 | 0.276 |
S5 | 0.629 | 0.363 | 0.185 |
S3 | 0.586 | 0.099 | 0.488 |
S14 | 0.198 | 0.765 | 0.296 |
S16 | 0.338 | 0.744 | 0.266 |
S15 | 0.333 | 0.739 | 0.165 |
S17 | 0.534 | 0.609 | 0.205 |
S18 | 0.470 | 0.584 | 0.359 |
S13 | 0.304 | 0.582 | 0.481 |
S12 | 0.355 | 0.577 | 0.414 |
S10 | 0.105 | 0.280 | 0.829 |
S9 | 0.390 | 0.143 | 0.774 |
S8 | 0.226 | 0.489 | 0.622 |
S1 | 0.276 | 0.340 | 0.599 |
S11 | 0.457 | 0.247 | 0.578 |
Indicator | Question Dimension | Group of Related Questions |
---|---|---|
System Usability | Perceived Ease of Use (Group FT1) | FT1 = (T10, T11, T12, T7, T9, T8) |
Perceived Usefulness (Group FT2) | FT2 = (T3, T5, T4, T1, T2, T6) | |
User Experience | Sensation and Emotion (Group FS1) | FS1 = (S6, S19, S7, S2, S20, S4, S5, S3) |
Action and Connection (Group FS2) | FS2 = (S14, S16, S15, S17, S18, S13, S12) | |
Cognition and Technology Awareness (Group FS3) | FS3 = (S10, S9, S8, S1, S11) |
Indicator | Question Dimension (Q. D.) | Cronbach’s α Coeff. of Q. D. | Cronbach’s α Coeffi. of Indicator |
---|---|---|---|
System Usability | Perceived Ease of Use (Group FT1) | 0.889 | 0.914 |
Perceived Usefulness (Group FT2) | 0.856 | ||
User Experience | Sensation and Emotion (Group FS1) | 0.911 | 0.956 |
Action and Connection (Group FS2) | 0.915 | ||
Cognition and Technology Awareness (Group FS3) | 0.867 |
Scale | df | χ2 | χ2/df | agfi | cfi | RMSEA | RMSEA (90% CI) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LO | HI | |||||||
System Usability | 50 | 68.814 | 1.376 | 0.870 | 0.976 | 0.055 | 0.013 | 0.085 |
User Experience | 70 | 183.140 | 1.308 | 0.824 | 0.976 | 0.050 | 0.027 | 0.069 |
Indicator | Question Dimension | Group of Related Questions | Construct Validity Value |
---|---|---|---|
System Usability | Perceived Ease of Use (Group FT1) | FT1 = (T10, T11, T12, T7, T9, T8) | 0.848 |
Perceived Usefulness (Group FT2) | FT2 = (T3, T5, T4, T1, T2, T6) | 0.849 | |
User Experience | Sensation and Emotion (Group FS1) | FS1 = (S6, S19, S7, S2, S20, S4, S5, S3) | 0.891 |
Action and Connection (Group FS2) | FS2 = (S14, S16, S15, S17, S18, S13, S12) | 0.885 | |
Cognition and Technology Awareness (Group FS3) | FS3 = (S10, S9, S8, S1, S11) | 0.836 |
No. | Question | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | |||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A+B) | ||||||
T10 | Operating the interactive system did not require much mental effort. | 4 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.456 | 71.0 | 29.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T11 | I think the operation of the interactive system is very intuitive. | 4 | 5 | 4.66 | 0.475 | 66.1 | 33.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T12 | The interaction while operating the interactive system was very smooth. | 4 | 5 | 4.69 | 0.463 | 69.4 | 30.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T7 | Learning to use the interactive system was easy for me. | 3 | 5 | 4.58 | 0.527 | 59.7 | 38.7 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
T9 | I think the interface of the interactive system is easy to understand. | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.473 | 71.8 | 27.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
T8 | I found that the interactive system made leisure exercise simpler for me. | 3 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.494 | 71.8 | 26.6 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
No. | Question | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | |||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A+B) | ||||||
T3 | During the experience, it enhanced my hand movements. | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.457 | 79.0 | 19.4 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
T5 | During the experience, it improved the coordination between my eyes, hands, and feet. | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
T4 | During the experience, it enhanced my leg movements. | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.496 | 75.8 | 21.8 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
T1 | Using this interactive system helps improve my physical health. | 3 | 5 | 4.75 | 0.453 | 75.8 | 23.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
T2 | During the experience, it made my leisure exercise easier. | 4 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.459 | 70.2 | 29.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
T6 | I am willing to continue using the interactive system. | 3 | 5 | 4.76 | 0.449 | 76.6 | 22.6 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
No. | Question | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | |||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A+B) | ||||||
S6 | During the experience, the interaction energized me. | 4 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.425 | 76.6 | 23.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S19 | It showed me how body movements can create leisure experiences with the interactive system. | 4 | 5 | 4.84 | 0.369 | 83.9 | 16.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S7 | During the experience, the audiovisual feedback attracted me to continue using it. | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.483 | 74.2 | 24.2 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S2 | During the experience, it made me feel a sense of friendliness. | 3 | 5 | 4.68 | 0.486 | 68.5 | 30.6 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S20 | The design of the interactive system made me more willing to engage with technology. | 3 | 5 | 4.79 | 0.428 | 79.8 | 19.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
S4 | During the experience, the music gave me a pleasant feeling. | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.444 | 77.4 | 21.8 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
S5 | During the experience, it enhanced my interest in leisure and entertainment. | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S3 | During the experience, it brought me a great visual experience. | 3 | 5 | 4.72 | 0.487 | 73.4 | 25.0 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
No. | Question | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | |||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A+B) | ||||||
S14 | When my friends ask, I will recommend this interactive system. | 3 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.423 | 80.6 | 18.5 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.1 |
S16 | If given the chance, I would experience this interactive system again | 4 | 5 | 4.81 | 0.397 | 80.6 | 19.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S15 | I would share this experience with my friends. | 4 | 5 | 4.80 | 0.403 | 79.8 | 20.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S17 | The interactive system has motivated me to engage in leisure activities. | 4 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.425 | 76.6 | 23.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S18 | The interactive system strengthened the connection between leisure activities and physical health. | 4 | 5 | 4.83 | 0.377 | 83.1 | 16.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
S13 | I would recommend this interactive system to my friends. | 3 | 5 | 4.73 | 0.479 | 75.0 | 23.4 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
S12 | After the experience, I understood the importance of leisure and entertainment. | 3 | 5 | 4.77 | 0.462 | 78.2 | 20.2 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 98.4 |
No. | Question | Min | Max | Mean | S.D. | Strongly Agree | Agree | No Opinion | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Percentage of Agreements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 Scores | 4 Scores | 3 Scores | 2 Scores | 1 Scores | |||||||
(A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F = A+B) | ||||||
S10 | After the experience, I gained a better understanding of the uses of technology. | 3 | 5 | 4.70 | 0.525 | 73.4 | 23.4 | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | 96.8 |
S9 | After the experience, I became more willing to try technology. | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.522 | 74.2 | 22.6 | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | 96.8 |
S8 | During the experience, I felt the entertainment aspect of technology. | 3 | 5 | 4.81 | 0.417 | 81.5 | 17.7 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 99.2 |
S1 | During the experience, the overall interaction was very engaging for me. | 3 | 5 | 4.72 | 0.503 | 74.2 | 23.4 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
S11 | After the experience, it changed my perception of interactive systems. | 3 | 5 | 4.71 | 0.506 | 73.4 | 24.2 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 97.6 |
Aspect | Question | Record of Interview Comments |
---|---|---|
System Interface Operation | What is your opinion on using body movements for interaction? |
|
What is your opinion on the operational interface of this work? |
| |
Was the process of learning and operating this work smooth for you? |
| |
Experience Feelings | What is your opinion on the exhibition setup or digital content design? |
|
Did you feel happy during the interactive experience? Why? |
| |
Do you have any other thoughts or feelings after the interactive experience? |
| |
Views on AI Integration in Elderly Exercise and Leisure | What is your opinion on applying AI technology to leisure and entertainment? |
|
Has AI technology increased your willingness to engage in leisure and entertainment activities? |
|
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, C.-M.; Shao, C.-H.; Lin, Y.-C. Design of an Interactive Exercise and Leisure System for the Elderly Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Motion-Sensing Technology. Sensors 2025, 25, 2315. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25072315
Wang C-M, Shao C-H, Lin Y-C. Design of an Interactive Exercise and Leisure System for the Elderly Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Motion-Sensing Technology. Sensors. 2025; 25(7):2315. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25072315
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Chao-Ming, Cheng-Hao Shao, and Yu-Ching Lin. 2025. "Design of an Interactive Exercise and Leisure System for the Elderly Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Motion-Sensing Technology" Sensors 25, no. 7: 2315. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25072315
APA StyleWang, C.-M., Shao, C.-H., & Lin, Y.-C. (2025). Design of an Interactive Exercise and Leisure System for the Elderly Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Motion-Sensing Technology. Sensors, 25(7), 2315. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25072315