Using MDE to Develop Suitable User Interfaces for Older Adults: A Case Study †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Related Work
3. The Telecare System
- UI models. These artifacts model user interfaces and their associated widgets (i.e., interactive elements embedded in the UI).
- Interaction models. These constructs specify all the tasks the software will perform, including user and system tasks. They were represented using a Concurrent Task Trees (CTT) structure [28].
- Navigation models. These models establish the structure of navigation for the UIs considered in the system, which is based on state machines.
- Domain models. These models specify the data to support the persistence and integrity of the information associated to the project.
- Dialog models. These communication constructs indicate the order in which tasks will be performed, as well as the interaction among users and the UIs.
4. Case Study Description
4.1. Goals and Hypotheses
4.2. Hypotheses Evaluation process
4.3. Participants Selection and Description
- Session 1: “St. Vincent de Paul home” protection center, in Circasia town, participated 7 men and 2 women. Session conducted on 28 March 2018.
- Session 2: “Infant Jesus of Prague home for the elderly” protection center, in Salento town, participated 3 men and 1 woman. Session conducted on 7 April 2018.
- Session 3: “Sacred Family welfare center for the elderly” protection center, in Filandia town, participated 4 men and 1 woman. Session conducted on 8 April 2018.
- Session 4: “Tarapacá grandparents welfare center” protection center, in Pijao town, participated 5 men and 1 woman. Session conducted on 14 April 2018.
4.4. Dynamics of the Evaluation Process
- Task 1: Reporting an illness. The user had to send a notification indicating a particular pain assigned to them.
- Task 2: Reading a news story. The user had to select a news story from a set shown by the system, and read the first two sentences.
- Task 3: Sending a message to a relative or friend. The user had to select a contact from a set (shown in a pictures carrousel) and send a personalized message to him/her.
5. Case Study Results
6. Threat to Validity
7. Conclusions and Future Work
Acknowledgments
References
- World Health Organization. World Health Statistics; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Villarreal, V.; Hervás, R.; Bravo, J. A Systematic Review for Mobile Monitoring Solutions in M-Health. J. Med. Syst. 2016, 40, 199:1–199:12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Giraldo, F.D.; Montes, S.G.; Olarte, Y.P. An Android Telecare Prototype for a Low-SES Seniors Living Facility: A Case Study, in Ambient Assisted Living. In Proceedings of the ICT-based Solutions in Real Life Situations: 7th International Work-Conference, IWAAL 2015, Puerto Varas, Chile, 1–4 December 2015; pp. 3–8. [Google Scholar]
- Gutierrez, F.J.; Muñoz, D.; Ochoa, S.F.; Tapia, J.M. Assembling mass-market technology for the sake of wellbeing: A case study on the adoption of ambient intelligent systems by older adults living at home. J Ambient Intell. Hum. Comput. 2017. [CrossRef]
- Johnson, E.; Hervás, R.; Gutiérrez López de la Franca, C.; Mondéjar, T.; Ochoa, S.F.; Favela, J. Assessing empathy and managing emotions through interactions with an affective avatar. Health Informatics Journal 2018, 24, 182–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schreurs, K.; Quan-Haase, A.; Martin, K. Problematizing the digital literacy paradox in the context of older adults’ ICT use: Aging, media discourse, and self-determination. Can. J. Commun. 2017, 42, 359–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Barros, A.C.; Rêgo, S.; Antunes, J. Aspects of Human-Centred Design in HCI with Older Adults: Experiences from the Field. In Human-Centered Software Engineering (HCSE’14); LNCS 8742; Sauer, S., Bogdan, C., Forbrig, P., Bernhaupt, R., Winckler, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Nurgalieva, L.; Jara-Laconich, J.J.; Báez, M.; Casati, F.; Marchese, M. Designing for older adults: Review of touchscreen design guidelines. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.06317. [Google Scholar]
- Leitch, S.; Warren, M.J. ETHICS: The past, present and future of socio-technical systems design. In History of Computing. Learning from the past; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; pp. 189–197. [Google Scholar]
- Bézivin, J. Model Driven Engineering: An Emerging Technical Space. In Generative and Transformational Techniques in Software Engineering: International Summer School; LNCS 4143; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; pp. 36–64. [Google Scholar]
- Silvestre, L. A domain specific language to support the definition of transformation rules for software process tailoring. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Mohagheghi, P.; Gilani, W.; Stefanescu, A.; Fernandez, M.A.; Nordmoen, B.; Fritzsche, M. Where does model-driven engineering help? Experiences from three industrial cases. Softw. Syst. Model. 2013, 12, 619–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maier, C.; Laumer, S.; Eckhardt, A. Technology Adoption by Elderly People—An Empirical Analysis of Adopters and Non-Adopters of Social Networking Sites. In Theory-Guided Modeling and Empiricism in Information Systems Research; Physica-Verlag HD: Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 85–110. [Google Scholar]
- Plattfaut, B.N.A.R. The MATH of Internet Adoption: Comparing Different Age-Groups. In Proceedings of the Wirtschaftsinformatik Proceedings 2011, Zürich, Switzerland, 16–18 February 2011; pp. 922–930. [Google Scholar]
- Häikiö, J.; Wallin, A.; Isomursu, M.; Ailisto, H.; Matinmikko, T.; Huomo, T. Touch-based user interface for elderly users. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services, Singapore, 11–14 September 2007; pp. 289–296. [Google Scholar]
- Hawthorn, D. Designing Effective Interfaces for Older Users. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Whittle, J.; Hutchinson, J.; Rouncefield, M. The State of Practice in Model-Driven Engineering. IEEE Softw. 2014, 31, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allegre, W.; Burger, T.; Berruet, P. Model-Driven Flow for Assistive Home Automation System Design. In Proceedings of the 18th World Congress The International Federation of Automatic Control, Milano, Italy, 28 August–2 September 2011; pp. 6466–6471. [Google Scholar]
- Allegre, W.; Burger, T.; Berruet, P.; Antoine, J.Y. A Non-intrusive Monitoring System for Ambient Assisted Living Service Delivery. In Impact Analysis of Solutions for Chronic Disease Prevention and Management. ICOST’12; LNCS 7251; Donnelly, M., Paggetti, C., Nugent, C., Mokhtari, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Parisa, R.; Mihailidis, A. A Survey on Ambient-Assisted Living Tools for Older. IEEE Journals & Magazine. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 2013, 17, 579–590. [Google Scholar]
- Koshima, A.A.; Englebert, V.; Amani, M.; Debieche, A.; Wakjira, A. A Model-Driven Engineering Approach for the Well-Being of Ageing People. In Advances in Conceptual Modeling; LNCS 9975; Link, S., Trujillo, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Mahmud, N.; Vogt, J.; Luyten, K.; Slegers, K.; Van den Bergh, J.; Coninx, K. Dazed and Confused Considered Normal: An Approach to Create Interactive Systems for People with Dementia. In Proc. of the Human-Centred Software Engineering (HCSE’10); LNCS 6409; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Hirschheim, R.; Klein, H.; Lyytinen, K. Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- de Angeli, A.; Bordin, S.; Blanco, M. Infrastructuring participatory development in information technology. In Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers-Volume 1; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 11–20. [Google Scholar]
- Pekkola, S.; Kaarilahti, N.; Pohjola, P. Towards formalized end-user participation in information systems development process: Bridging the gap between participatory design and ISD methodologies. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Participatory Design: Expanding Boundaries in Design; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2006; Volume 1, pp. 21–30. [Google Scholar]
- Kensing, F.; Blomberg, J. Participatory design: Issues and concerns. Comput. Support. Coop. Work J. 1998, 7, 167–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bratteteig, T.; Wagner, I. Unpacking the notion of participation in Participatory Design. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 2016, 25, 425–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Midlov, P.; Ekdahl, C.; OlssonMoller, U.; Kristensson, J.; Jakobsson, U. Predictive validity and cut-off scores in four diagnostic tests for falls—A study in frail older people at home. Phys. Occup. Ther. Geriatr. 2012, 30, 189–201. [Google Scholar]
- Wohlin, C.; Runeson, P.; Host, M.; Ohlsson, M.C.; Regnell, B.; Wesslen, A. Planning; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; p. 27. [Google Scholar]
- Saitou, N. Binomial Distribution A2-Maloy, Stanley. In Brenner’s Encyclopedia of Genetics, 2nd ed.; Hughes, K., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2013; p. 331. [Google Scholar]
- Trigás-Ferrín, M.; Meijide-Míguez, H. Scale for functional assessment of older adults. Galicia Clin. 2011, 72, 5, (In Spanish: Escalas de valoración funcional en el anciano). [Google Scholar]
- Downing, S.M. Validity threats: Overcoming interference with proposed interpretations of assessment data. Med. Educ. 2004, 38, 327–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Item | Answer |
---|---|
Have you used computer technology before? | Yes/No |
Do you understand the meaning of the icons in the user interface? | Yes/No |
Do you understand the text mgs shown by the application? | Yes/No |
Task 1 was successfully finished? | Yes/No |
Time elapsed to perform task 1 | [0 s …) |
Task 2 was successfully finished? | Yes/No |
Time elapsed to perform task 2 | [0 s …) |
Task 3 was successfully finished? | Yes/No |
Time elapsed to perform task 3 | [0 s …) |
Particip. # | Age | Have You Used Techn. Before? | Understand the Meaning of the Icons? | Understand the Text Msg? | Time Task 1 | Time Task 2 | Time Task 3 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Session 1 | 1 | 82 | No | Yes | Yes | 22.0 s | 27.2 s | 10.2 s |
2 | 85 | No | No | Yes | 18.2 s | 26.9 s | 15.1 s | |
3 | 84 | No | Yes | Yes | 14.7 s | 26.4 s | 20.1 s | |
4 | 71 | No | Yes | Yes | 8.8 s | 10.2 s | 14.5 s | |
5 | 58 | No | Yes | Yes | 6.5 s | 14.0 s | 6.4 s | |
6 | 82 | No | Yes | Yes | 11.3 s | 21.2 s | 12.0 s | |
7 | 82 | Yes | No | No | 15.3 s | 25.8 s | 10.4 s | |
8 | 65 | No | Yes | Yes | 14.2 s | 24.8 s | 6.9 s | |
Average: | 76.5 | 14.2 s | 22.0 s | 11.9 s | ||||
Session 2 | 10 | 79 | No | No | No | -- | -- | 19.2 s |
11 | 78 | No | No | Yes | 17.7 s | 10.0 s | 12.2 s | |
12 | 90 | No | No | Yes | 10.8 s | -- | 18.0 s | |
13 | 74 | Yes | Yes | Yes | 12.6 s | 16.9 s | 10.8 s | |
Average: | 80.2 | 13.7 s | 13.4 s | 15.0 s | ||||
Session 3 | 14 | 71 | No | Yes | Yes | 15.4 s | 10.3 s | 15.1 s |
15 | 59 | No | Yes | Yes | 20.2 s | 18.0 s | 11.2 s | |
16 | 79 | No | No | Yes | 10.4 s | 14.7 s | 15.0 s | |
17 | 75 | No | Yes | Yes | 11.2 s | 13.9 s | 11.1 s | |
18 | 76 | No | No | No | -- | -- | -- | |
Average: | 72 | 14.3 s | 14.2 s | 13.1 s | ||||
Session 4 | 19 | 82 | No | Yes | Yes | 11.9 s | 16.3 s | 18.0 s |
20 | 73 | No | Yes | Yes | 8.2 s | 21.9 s | 13.7 s | |
21 | 76 | No | Yes | No | 22.8 s | -- | -- | |
22 | 90 | No | No | No | -- | -- | -- | |
23 | 80 | No | Yes | Yes | 27.3 s | 14.1 s | 13.4 s | |
24 | 72 | No | No | Yes | -- | -- | 9.6 s | |
Average: | 78.8 | 17.5 s | 17.4 s | 13.6 s | ||||
Average: | 76.8 | 14.8 s | 18.3 s | 13.1 s | ||||
Std. dev.: | 8.0 | 5.2 s | 6.0 s | 3.8 s |
Dependent variables | Value |
---|---|
Number of individuals who responded have not interacted with technology | 22 |
Number of individuals who understood all icons of the application | 15 |
Number of individuals who understood the text shown by the application | 18 |
Percentage of individuals who successfully performed task 1 (reporting an illness) | 83.3% |
Average time spent in task 1 | 14.8 s |
Percentage of individuals who successfully performed task 2 (reading a news story) | 70.8% |
Average time spent in task 2 | 18.3 s |
Percentage of individuals who successfully performed task 3 (sending a message) | 83.3% |
Average time spent in task 3 | 13.1 s |
Categ. | Threat | How Was the Empirical Validation Addressed? |
---|---|---|
Conclusion | Low statistical power | The importance of the results is critical due to the need to demonstrate the stated hypothesis system. Statistical evidence was respected by following strict protocols to apply the analysis of the results, seeking relations, conclusions, attributes, and dependence of data. |
Assumptions violated by statistical tests | Statistical assumptions were kept in the hypothesis test, carrying out a binomial distribution. | |
Error rate | The significance value was established from a review of the literature on regular configurations for experiments similar to the one reported in this paper (< 0.05). This represents 95% of certainty that the association we are studying is not random. | |
Reliability of the measurements | The values assumed by the observed variables were established by a tracking system that run in background during the experiments and that recorded a detailed log file for each participant. A cross-checking process with the observer participating in each session, and also with the information stored in the log file, was done after the experiment to determine the reliability of the main results. | |
Random irrelevance in experimental fit | No elements arose outside the experimental environment in the sessions of this experiment. | |
Random heterogeneity of assignments | To guarantee participant heterogeneity in this evaluation process, the study involved a sample of adults from four social protection centers. The inclusion of these people was decided after applying them a standard physical and mental disability test proposed by the Red Cross [31]. | |
Internal | History | Participants worked only once in the experiment, therefore, there was no influence related to the history. Moreover, no effects were reported due to the execution of the validation at different time periods. |
Maturation | Due to considerations of environment, participants profile, and selection criteria, we selected the samples that changed in similar manner during the experiment. | |
Instrumentation | A stable and reliable prototype was developed through conceptual models. The system was adequate for the hypotheses validation and avoided us shortcomings with the users during the evaluation process. | |
Statistical regression | Participants were selected based on the results of an evaluation where a regular instrument proposed by the Red Cross was used. No additional classification tasks were applied to the participants. | |
Selection | Equivalent groups were required, considering the inclusion criteria reported in Section 4.3. | |
Mortality | Participants were free to abandon the experiment at any moment. However, this never happened during the experiment. | |
Construct | Inadequate preoperational explanation of constructions | To avoid lack of clarity in both the assigned tasks to the users and the functionalities of the prototype, personalized training was conducted with each elderly adult before the experiment. |
Mono-method partiality | Multiple complementary measures were used to assess the autonomous capacity of older adults to use the prototype. Several observations resulting from the participants suggested subjective interpretation, and they were measured according to the theoretical expectation of the researchers. | |
Guessing hypothesis | The experiment suffers from this threat, which was reduced by not discussing about the research questions. | |
Restricted generalizability through constructions | Considering the simplicity of the evaluation scenario, experimental results have high probability to be generalizable to other scenarios with similar characteristics. | |
Experimenter expectations | The researchers had expectations on the possible applicability and use of prototypes generated using the MDE approach. However, any attempt to influence the opinions or behavior of the participants was avoided. | |
External | Interaction of selection and treatment | The sample of participants chosen for the experiment was objectively selected using a clear inclusion criteria. Moreover, the size of the sample seems to be large enough to determine suitability of the system for older adults with characteristics similar to the participants (i.e., farmers and elderlies living in rural areas). The population characteristics showed no signs of a possible influence on the results. |
Interaction of the environment and treatment | Researchers were especially careful in using an adequate and representative language to instruct the participants about how to use the prototype. No direct explanations were given to the users to help them perform the assigned tasks. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2018 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
Olarte, Y.P.; Giraldo, F.D.; Giraldo, W.J.; Ochoa, S.F.; Hervás, R. Using MDE to Develop Suitable User Interfaces for Older Adults: A Case Study. Proceedings 2018, 2, 1201. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2191201
Olarte YP, Giraldo FD, Giraldo WJ, Ochoa SF, Hervás R. Using MDE to Develop Suitable User Interfaces for Older Adults: A Case Study. Proceedings. 2018; 2(19):1201. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2191201
Chicago/Turabian StyleOlarte, Yonatan Pineda, Fáber D. Giraldo, William J. Giraldo, Sergio F. Ochoa, and Ramón Hervás. 2018. "Using MDE to Develop Suitable User Interfaces for Older Adults: A Case Study" Proceedings 2, no. 19: 1201. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2191201
APA StyleOlarte, Y. P., Giraldo, F. D., Giraldo, W. J., Ochoa, S. F., & Hervás, R. (2018). Using MDE to Develop Suitable User Interfaces for Older Adults: A Case Study. Proceedings, 2(19), 1201. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2191201