臺灣高齡人口的數量逐年增長，其購買潛力自然不容小覷，然而多數製造與開發者對於此類使用者的認識有限，導致市場上的消費性產品鮮少能完全滿足高齡族群的需求，也因此而錯失了良機。許多現有的人因工程的測試與評估技術能協助開發者了解使用者的需求並確認是否予以滿足，但通常需要有專業背景的人員始能順利執行，因此本研究期望發展一套專家系統，以輔助沒有評估經驗的開發者執行使用者評估，使其所開發的產品更加符合高齡使用者的需求。因高齡使用者接觸的產品類型眾多，本研究選定愈來愈多高齡者在日常生活皆會接觸、仰賴的手機應用程式做為研究標的物，在驗證此方法的可行性與有效性後，可再延伸至其他類型的產品或服務。
欲判斷一手機應用程式是否適合高齡使用者，大致上會經歷三個階段：（1）「有沒有使用此產品的動機、欲望？」，即高齡者接納一項新產品的心理需求；（2）「想要使用該產品後，實際操作時的基本互動—包含輸入以及輸出—是否符合使用者的能力限制？」；（3）「滿足操作的最低需求後，產品的操作過程是否有良好的易用性？」，例如是否直覺、順手…等。因此，本研究先將針對這三個面向搜尋相關文獻，以定義滿足各面向的評估指標、對應的測量工具與工具的使用方法、衍生的具體改善建議，進而整合為一套高齡使用者評估的知識資料庫，後續再開發容易理解、上手的使用者互動介面，即可以整併為一套專家系統。
當手機應用程式的開發者使用本研究開發的專家系統時，需依序完成三個步驟：（1）設定評估任務：選定欲評估應用程式中哪個流程，並輸入其任務名稱、任務敘述、預期應花費的時間等；（2）選擇手勢：選取該流程所涉及的操作手勢，如單擊、雙擊、拖曳…等；（3）設定易用性權重：成對比較效率、效用、可學習性、易接近性、通用性等五項易用性屬性，以決定相對重要性的排序。接著，系統將根據上述的設定提供高齡使用者評估的工具—包含評估指標、測量工具、評估流程—，待其邊參考邊自立完成、輸入評估結果後，系統會協助評斷當前的設計是否符合高齡使用者的需求，若有必要亦將提供具體的設計改善建議。
於系統開發完畢後，本研究招募兩位具備手機應用程式開發經驗且缺乏系統性使用者評估經驗的開發者、六位60歲以上的高齡使用者協助驗證此系統的可行性（無使用者評估經驗之手機應用程式開發者於開發過程中，能夠藉由此專家系統完成使用者評估的程度）；亦招募兩位手機應用程式開發者、七位60歲以上高齡使用者協助驗證此系統的有效性（開發者藉由專家系統的輔助完成使用者評估後，能夠依據評估結果改善應用程式的程度）與易用性（在使用專家系統取得使用者評估工具、執行使用者評估的過程中，手機應用程式開發者能夠達成效率、效能、滿意等目標的程度），其中協助驗證可行性的手機應用程式開發者與協助驗證有效性、易用性的開發者為相同兩人；協助驗證此系統的六位高齡者當中有四位協助驗證系統的有效性與易用性。
驗證結果顯示：缺乏系統性使用者評估經驗的手機應用程式開發者能夠有效率地藉由此專家系統的輔助於開發過程中完成使用者評估，且開發者自覺此專家系統提供的評估結果能夠有效地協助其改善手機應用程式；然而從高齡使用者的角度觀之，應用程式的改善未盡理想，並無法感受到明顯的差異，亦即有效性未盡理想。由於結果顯示此專家系統可行且易用，但有效性尚待改進，本研究進一步探討了影響有效性結果的潛在因素，包含開發者修改手機應用程式的動機與策略、高齡者填答評估量表的能力、開發者對高齡族群的熟悉程度、專家系統提供的評估協助之完整性、系統提供的改善建議之具體性等，並據此提出了專家系統的改善對策。
整體而言，本研究開發了一個專家系統，讓缺乏系統性使用者評估經驗的應用程式開發者能夠獨力執行高齡使用者評估，且系統可依評估結果提供改善建議以協助開發者修改手機應用程式，以符合使用者需求；基於系統驗證的結果，本系統應能輔助無使用者研究相關部門或專門人才的業者或個人評估開發的手機應用程式成品。此外，本研究蒐集並回顧了與高齡手機應用程式使用者的相關文獻，進而歸納整合為一涵蓋手機應用程式之易用性屬性、操作手勢、設計指引、高齡者心理需求的知識資料庫，未來亦可延伸應用於其他高齡使用者評估的相關研究。

Despite the increasing growth of the elderly population in Taiwan, there are limited consumer products suitable for elderly users available in the market. Although there are many testing and evaluation methods to help confirm whether a product fits the user’s needs or not, most of them require an expert to get involved. Thus, this study aims to develop an expert system to help product developers who are without prior experience to easily conduct evaluation with elderly users, so as to better meet the elderly users’ needs. Among the many consumer products, mobile phone applications that have become more and more frequently used in daily lives were defined as the target product.
Before using a mobile phone application, the elderly may ask three questions: (1) “Does it satisfy my needs?” i.e. psychological needs that motivate the elderly to accept it. (2) “After being willing to use it, does the basic interaction fit my capability?” (3) “If the product fits the lowest requirement of use, is it easy to use?” To solve these problems, three aspects of knowledge were taken into consideration, including psychological needs, basic interaction, and general usability. Following this, literature review was conducted to define the three aspects of knowledge, that are subsequently integrated into a database. Integrated with an understandable and easy-to-use interface, an expert system was hence developed.
While using this system, the application developer has to first identify the tasks to be evaluated, including the name, description, and completion time of the task. After specifying gestures required for operation (such as tap, long tap, drag), the application developer has to set priorities of usability properties by making pair-wise comparisions among effectiveness, efficiency, learnability, accessibility, and generability. Subsequenity, evaluation tools will be automatically presented with instructions for the application developer to follow. Once the evaluation is completed, the system will help judge whether the design is suitable for elderly users. If needed, suggestions for improving the application will be provided as well.
After building the system, two mobile developers without any experience of systematic user evaluation and six elderly users over 60 years old were recruited to help validate the usability of the expert system. Besides, two developers and seven elderly users over 60 years old were recruited to help validate the effectiveness and feasibility of this system. The two developers are the same in all of the validation, whereas four elderly users help evaluate both usability and effectiveness of the expert system.
The results showed that mobile application developers without prior experience of systematic user evaluation can complete user evaluation with this system’s assistance, and they considered the evaluation results as helpful for improving the design of mobile applications. However, the elderly users didn’t recognize the difference between the original and revised versions of the mobile application, showing that the effectiveness of the system isn’t good enough. Interviews were further performed to help explore the possible factors that led to this result, including motivation and strategy for developers to modify mobile apps, the elderly user’s ability to well understand the evaluation scales, the developers' familiarity with the elderly users, the comprehensiveness of the assistance provided by the expert system, and the clarity of the suggestions for design improvement provided by the system. Following them, strategies for improving the expert system were proposed.
In summary, this study proposes a system to help mobile application developers conduct user evaluation with elderly users. Besides, suggestions for design improvement can be provided based on the evaluation results. According to the validation results, this system should be able to help companies or individuals evaluate the final product of mobile applications with elderly users. Besides, this study reviewed literature related to elderly users of mobile applications, and then integrated usability attributions, gestures, design guidelines and psychological needs of elderly users in a knowledge database. This database can be further extended for related studies in the future.

中文摘要......................................................................................................................................I
英文摘要...................................................................................................................................III
圖目錄…………………………………………………………………….………………….VII
表目錄………………………………..……………………………………………………….IX
第一章 緒論…………..……………………………………………………………………..... 1
1.1. 研究背景與動機 1
1.2. 研究目的與範圍 4
1.3. 研究架構與流程 7
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………………………………. 9
2.1. 老化現象與影響 9
2.1.1. 高齡的定義………………………………………………………………… 9
2.1.2. 伴隨老化現象的生理功能退化………………………………………….… 10
2.1.3. 伴隨老化現象的認知功能退化………………………………………….… 13
2.1.4. 高齡者獨特的需求及行為……………………………………………….… 16
2.2. 高齡者與行動應用裝置 17
2.2.1. 行動應用裝置的普及和影響………………….…………………………… 18
2.3. 開發適合高齡族群的產品 21
2.3.1. 使用者中心設計………………………………………………………….… 21
2.3.2. 產品開發流程…………………………………………………………….… 22
2.3.3. 使用者中心設計應用於產品開發……………………………………….… 23
2.3.4. 使用者中心設計用於於軟體開發……………………………………….… 24
2.4. 專家系統與產品開發 30
2.4.1. 專家系統……………………………………………………………………. 31
2.4.2. 專家系統與產品開發………………………………………………………. 31
2.4.3. 專家系統之評估……………………………………………………………. 32
2.5. 小結 34
第三章 手機應用程式的知識資料庫………………………………………………………. 35
3.1. 文獻搜索方法 35
3.2. 基本互動 38
3.2.1. 輸入與輸出…………………………………………………………………. 38
3.2.2. 輸入…………………………………………………………………………. 40
3.2.3. 輸出…………………………………………………………………………. 43
3.3. 心理需求 45
3.4. 普遍易用性原則 48
3.5. 小結 50
第四章 系統開發與驗證設計………………………………………………………………. 51
4.1. 專家系統運作流程 51
4.2. 專家系統介面與互動流程介紹 53
4.3. 專家系統驗證方法 63
4.4. 小結 70
第五章 專家系統驗證結果與討論…………………………………………………………. 71
5.1. 專家系統可行性評估之結果與改善方向 71
5.2. 專家系統有效性評估結果與改善方向 74
5.2.1. 開發者觀點的有效性………………………………………………………. 74
5.2.2. 使用者觀點的有效性………………………………………………………. 76
5.2.3. 造成有效性結果不佳的可能原因…………………………………………. 77
5.3. 易用性評估結果與專家系統改善方向擬定 81
5.4. 專家系統改善後的模擬示意圖 84
第六章 結論…………………………………………………………………………………. 95
6.1. 主要發現 95
6.2. 研究貢獻與相關應用 96
6.3. 研究限制與未來方向 97
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………………. 100
附錄一、基本互動資料庫參考文獻整理..................….…………………………………...115
附錄二、輸入建議…………………………….……………………………………………121
附錄三、輸出建議………………………………………………………………………….122
附錄四、心理需求量表…………………………………………………………………….123
附錄五、滿意度量表……………………………………………………………………….125
附錄六、可理解性量表…………………………………………………………………….128
附錄七、可學習性量表…………………………………………………………………….130
附錄八、通用性量表……………………………………………………………………….132
附錄九、效率量表………………………………………………………………………….133
附錄十、效用量表……………………………………………….………………………….135
附錄十一、易接近性量表………………………………………………………………….136
附錄十二、熟手開發者應用程式畫面…………………………………………………….137
附錄十三、新手開發者應用程式畫面…………………………………………………….138
附錄十四、新手開發者設計指引修改版應用程式之修改計畫………………………….139
附錄十五、新手開發者專家系統修改版應用程式之修改計畫………………………….141
附錄十六、熟手開發者設計指引修改版應用程式之修改計畫………………………….144
附錄十七、熟手開發者專家系統修版應用程式之修改計畫…………………………….146

1. Adam, P. (2016). The History of the Smartphone. Mobile Industry Review. Retrieved from http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2016/10/the-history-of-the-smartphone.html
2. Annaiahshetty, K. & Prasad, N. (2013). Expert System for Multiple Domain Experts Knowledge Acquisition in Software Design and Development. Paper presented at the Computer Modelling and Simulation (UKSim), 2013 UKSim 15th International Conference on.
3. Aula, A. (2005). User study on older adults’ use of the Web and search engines. Universal Access in the Information Society. 4(1), 67-81.
4. Bachmann, I., & Zúñiga, H. (2013). News Platform Preference as a predictor of political and civic participation. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 19(4), 496–512. doi: 10.1177/1354856513493699
5. Balbo, S. (1995). Automatic evaluation of user in- terface usability: Dream or reality. In S. Balbo, Ed., Proceedings of the Queensland Computer- Human Interaction Symposium (Queensland, Australia, August). Bond University.
6. Baldi, R. (1997). Training Older Adults To Use The Computer: Issues Related To The Workplace, Attitudes, And Training. Educational Gerontology,23(5), 453-465. doi:10.1080/0360126970230505
7. Bangor, A., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. (2008). An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction,24(6), 574-594. doi:10.1080/10447310802205776
8. Barros, A., Leitão, R., & Ribeiro, J. (2014). Design and Evaluation of a Mobile User Interface for Older Adults: Navigation, Interaction and Visual Design Recommendations.
Procedia Computer Science,27, 369-378. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.02.041
9. Barros, A., Rêgo, S., & Antunes, J. (2014). Aspects of Human-Centred Design in HCI with Older Adults: Experiences from the Field. Advanced Information Systems Engineering Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 235-242.
10. Barton, J., Love, D., & Taylor, G. (2001). Design determines 70% of cost? A review of implications for design evaluation. Journal of Engineering Design, 12(1), 47-58.
11. Birren, J. (2013). Handbook of the Psychology of Aging: Elsevier Science.
12. Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary Methods: Capturing Life as it is Lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 579–616. doi:10.1146/
annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
13. Bowers, R., Meek, C., & Stewart, N. (2001). Illumination and reading performance in age‐related macular degeneration. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 84(3), 139-147.
14. Brame, C. (2016). Effective Educational Videos: Principles and Guidelines for Maximizing Student Learning from Video Content. CBE—Life Sciences Education,15(4). doi:10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125
15. Brassard, M. (1991). The memory joggerTM: a pocket guide of tools for continuous improvement. Salem (NH): GOAL/QPC.
16. Brewster, S., Wright, P., & Edwards, A. (1995). Experimentally derived guidelines for the creation of earcons. Paper presented at the Adjunct Proceedings of HCI.
17. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. 189(194), 4-7.
18. Budiu, R. & Nielsen, J. (2009). Usability of mobile websites: 85 design guidelines for improving access to web-based content and services through mobile devices: Nielsen Norman Group.
19. Budiu, R. & Nielsen, J. (2011). Usability of ipad apps and websites. Retrieved from www.nngroup.com/reports/ipad-app-and-website-usability
20. Butler, R. & Maddox, G. (1995). Encyclopedia of Aging. In: Springer, New York.
21. Calearo, C. & Lazzaroni, A. (1957). Speech intelligibility in relation to the speed of the message. The Laryngoscope, 67(5), 410-419.
22. Cáliz, D., Alamán, X., Martínez, L., Cáliz, R., Terán, C., & Peñafiel, V. (2016). Examining the Usability of Touch Screen Gestures for Elderly People. Paper presented at the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing and Ambient Intelligence.
23. Chen, K., Chan, H. & Tsang, N. (2013). Usage of Mobile Phones amongst Elderly People in Hong Kong. In Proceedings of the International Multi-Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists (IMECS 2013).
24. Chung, E., Park, N., Wang, H., Fulk, J., & Mclaughlin, M. (2010). Age differences in perceptions of online community participation among non-users: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers in Human Behavior,26(6), 1674-1684. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.016
25. Chung, J., Chaudhuri, S., Le, T., Chi, N., Thompson, H., & Demiris, G. (2015). The Use of Think-Aloud to Evaluate a Navigation Structure for a Multimedia Health and Wellness Application for Older Adults and Their Caregivers. Educational Gerontology,41(12), 916-929. doi:10.1080/03601277.2015.1071586
26. Ciere, Y., Jaarsma, D., Visser, A., Sanderman, R., Snippe, E., & Fleer, J. (2015). Studying learning in the healthcare setting: the potential of quantitative diary methods. Perspectives on Medical Education, 4(4), 203–207. doi: 10.1007/s40037-015-0199-3
27. Clinite, J. (2012). The preferences in wine of various aged consumers (Unpublished master's thesis).
28. Cody, J., Dunn, D., Hoppin, S., & Wendt, P. (1999). Silver surfers: Training and evaluating internet use among older adult learners. Communication Education,48(4), 269-286. doi:10.1080/03634529909379178
29. Cole, C., Laurent, G., Drolet, A., Ebert, J., Gutchess, A., Lambert-Pandraud, R., … Peters, E. (2008). Decision making and brand choice by older consumers. Marketing Letters, 19(3-4), 355–365. doi: 10.1007/s11002-008-9058-x
30. Conci, M., Pianesi, F., & Zancanaro, M. (2009). Useful, Social and Enjoyable: Mobile Phone Adoption by Older People. Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2009 Lecture Notes in Computer Science,63-76. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03655-2_7
31. Connelly, S. & Hasher, L. (1993). Aging and the inhibition of spatial location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,19(6), 1238-1250. doi:10.1037//0096-1523.19.6.1238
32. Cooper, R. (n.d.). Winning at new products: Accelerating the process from idea to launch. New York: Basic Books.
33. Coren, S. (1994). Most comfortable listening level as a function of age. Ergonomics,37(7), 1269-1274. doi:10.1080/00140139408964905
34. Cruickshanks, K., Wiley, T., Tweed, T., Klein, B., Klein, R., Mares-Perlman, J., & Nondahl, D. (1998). Prevalence of Hearing Loss in Older Adults in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin: The Epidemiology of Hearing Loss Study. American Journal of Epidemiology,148(9), 879-886. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009713
35. Czaja, S. & Sharit, J. (1993). Age differences in the performance of computer-based work. Psychology and Aging,8(1), 59-67. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.8.1.59
36. Davis, A. (1989). The Prevalence of Hearing Impairment and Reported Hearing Disability among Adults in Great Britain. International Journal of Epidemiology,18(4), 911-917. doi:10.1093/ije/18.4.911
37. Davis, H., Small, S., Stern, Y., Mayeux, R., Feldstein, S., & Keller, F. (2003). Acquisition, Recall, and Forgetting of Verbal Information in Long-Term Memory by Young, Middle-Aged, and Elderly Individuals. Cortex,39(4-5), 1063-1091. doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70878-5
38. Driscoll, D.L. (2011), “Introduction to primary research: Observations, surveys, and interviews”, Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Vol. 2, pp. 153–174.
39. Earthy, J. & Jones, B. (2010). Best practice for addressing human element issues in the shipping industry. Paper presented at the International conference on human performance at sea (HPAS), Glasgow, UK.
40. Earthy, J., Jones, B., & Bevan, N. (2012). ISO Standards for User-Centered Design and the Specification of Usability. Usability in Government Systems,267-283. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-391063-9.00049-3
41. Economou, A. (2009). Memory score discrepancies by healthy middle-aged and older individuals: the contributions of age and education. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15(6), 963-972.
42. Ehn, P. (1989). Work-oriented design of computer artifacts. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum.
43. Eisma, R., Dickinson, A., Goodman, J., Syme, A., Tiwari, L., & Newell, A. (2004). Early user involvement in the development of information technology-related products for older people. Universal Access in the Information Society, 3(2), 131–140. doi: 10.1007/s10209-004-0092-z
44. Elliott, D. (1987). Contrast sensitivity decline with ageing: a neural or optical phenomenon? Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 7(4), 415-419.
45. Falamarzi, A., Borhan, M., & Rahmat, R. (2014). Developing a Web-Based Advisory Expert System for Implementing Traffic Calming Strategies. The Scientific World Journal,2014, 1-16. doi:10.1155/2014/757981
46. Fekri, S., Tajalizadeh, H., & Jafari, S. (2013). Design and Development of an Expert System to Help Head of University Departments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.0356.
47. Feldman, R. & Reger, S. (1967). Relations Among Hearing, Reaction Time, and Age. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research,10(3), 479-495. doi:10.1044/jshr.1003.479
48. Findlater, L., Froehlich, J., Fattal, K., Wobbrock, J., & Dastyar, T. (2013). Age-related differences in performance with touchscreens compared to traditional mouse input. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 13. doi:10.1145/2470654.2470703
49. Finstad, K. (2010). The Usability Metric for User Experience. Interacting with Computers,22(5), 323-327. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2010.04.004
50. Foster, A. (2015). Consumer expenditures vary by age. Beyond the Numbers, 4(14). Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
51. Fozard, J., Wolf, E., Bell, B., McFarland, R., & Podolsky, S. (1977). Visual perception and communication. Handbook of the Psychology of Aging. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York.
52. Galli, G., Sirota, M., Gruber, J., Ivanof, E., Ganesh, J., & Materassi, M. (2018). Learning facts during aging: the benefits of curiosity. Experimental aging research, 1-18.
53. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., & Vlissides, J. (1994). Design patterns: elements of. In: Addison-Wesley.
54. Gao, Q., & Sun, Q. (2015). Examining the Usability of Touch Screen Gestures for Older and Younger Adults. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(5), 835–863. doi: 10.1177/0018720815581293
55. Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions,6(1), 21-29. doi:10.1145/291224.291235
56. Gazzaley, A., Cooney, W., Rissman, J., & D'esposito, M. (2005). Top-down suppression deficit underlies working memory impairment in normal aging. Nature neuroscience, 8(10), 1298.
57. Gómez, R., Caballero, D., & Sevillano, J. (2014). Heuristic Evaluation on Mobile Interfaces: A New Checklist. The Scientific World Journal,2014, 1-19. doi:10.1155/2014/434326
58. Gregor, P., Newell, F., & Zajicek, M. (2002). Designing for dynamic diversity: interfaces for older people. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the fifth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies.
59. Grigera, J., Garrido, A., Rivero, J., & Rossi, G. (2017). Automatic detection of usability smells in web applications. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 97, 129–148. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.09.009
60. Grossman, T., Fitzmaurice, G., & Attar, R. (2009). A survey of software learnability: metrics, methodologies and guidelines. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
61. Haaland, Y., Price, L., & Larue, A. (2003). What does the WMS–III tell us about memory changes with normal aging? Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9(1), 89-96.
62. Haarmann, J., Ashling, E., Davelaar, J., & Usher, M. (2005). Age-related declines in context maintenance and semantic short-term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 58(1), 34-53.
63. Hamza, Q. (2012). Apple: from iPhone 1 to iPhone 5 – Evolution, Features and Future Review. The News Tribe. Retrieved from https://www.thenewstribe.com/2012/07/16/apple-from-iphone-1-to-iphone-5-evolution-features-and-future-review/
64. Harada, S., Sato, D., Takagi, H., & Asakawa, C. (2013). Characteristics of Elderly User Behavior on Mobile Multi-touch Devices. Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2013 Lecture Notes in Computer Science,323-341. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40498-6_25
65. Hassan, Y. & Martín, F. (2003). Guía de evaluación heurística de sitios web. 2.
66. Hawthorn, D. (2006). Designing effective interfaces for older users. PhD Thesis University of Waikato
67. Highhouse, S. & Psychology, O. (2008). Stubborn reliance on intuition and subjectivity in employee selection. 1(3), 333-342.
68. Hilt, M., & Lipschultz, J. (2016). Mass media, an aging population, and the baby boomers. London: Routledge.
69. HINC-02. Age of Householder-Households, by Total Money Income, Type of Household, Race and Hispanic Origin of Householder.(2017).U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-hinc/hinc-02.html
70. Ho, G., Scialfa, T., Caird, K., & Graw, T. (2001). Visual search for traffic signs: The effects of clutter, luminance, and aging. Human factors, 43(2), 194-207.
71. Hoffman, R., Hancock, A., Scerbo, W., Parasuraman, R., & Szalma, L. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of applied perception research: Cambridge University Press.
72. Hogan, J. (2003). Divided attention in older but not younger adults is impaired by anxiety. Experimental aging research, 29(2), 111-136.
73. Holzinger, A. (2005). Usability engineering methods for software developers. 48(1), 71-74.
74. Hussain, A. & Kutar, M. (2009). Usability metric framework for mobile phone application. 2099, 978-971.
75. Hwangbo, H., Yoon, H., Jin, S., Han, S., & Ji, Y.(2013). A study of pointing performance of elderly users on smartphones. 29(9), 604-618.
76. Jiannan, L. & Sutapa, D. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~jiannali/course/wizard_of_oz.html#advantages
77. Jin, Z., Plocher, T., & Kiff, L. (2007). Touch screen user interfaces for older adults: button size and spacing. Paper presented at the International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction.
78. Johnson, J. & Finn, K. (2017). Designing User Interfaces for an Aging Population: Towards Universal Design: Morgan Kaufmann.
79. Judge, T., Pyla, P., McCrickard, D., Harrison, S., & Hartson, H. R. (2008). Studying group decision making in affinity diagramming. Paper presented at Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University.
80. Kalimullah, K. & Sushmitha, D. (2017). Influence of design elements in mobile applications on user experience of elderly people. 113, 352-359.
81. Kalton, G. & Piesse, A. (2007). Survey research methods in evaluation and case–control studies. Statistics in Medicine,26(8), 1675-1687. doi:10.1002/sim.2796
82. Kälviäinen, N., Schlich, P., & Tuorila, H. (2000). Consumer Texture Preferences: Effect Of Age, Gender And Previous Experience. Journal of Texture Studies,31(6), 593-607. doi:10.1111/j.1745-4603.2000.tb01022.x
83. Kantner, L., Sova, D., & Rosenbaum, S. (2003). Alternative methods for field usability research. Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Documentation - SIGDOC 03. doi:10.1145/944868.944883
84. Kausler, H. (2011). Learning and memory in normal aging. San Diego: Academic Press.
85. Ketcham, C., Seidler, R., Gemmert, A., & Stelmach, G. (2002). Age-Related Kinematic Differences as Influenced by Task Difficulty, Target Size, and Movement Amplitude. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,57(1). doi:10.1093/geronb/57.1.p54
86. Kim, H. & Jin, S. (2015). Development of auditory design guidelines for improving learning on mobile phones. 91, 60-72.
87. Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: introducing focus groups. 311(7000), 299-302.
88. Kobayashi, M., Hiyama, A., Miura, T., Asakawa, C., Hirose, M., & Ifukube, T. (2011). Elderly user evaluation of mobile touchscreen interactions. Paper presented at the IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.
89. Korteling, J. (1994). Effects of aging, skill modification, and demand alternation on multiple-task performance. Human factors, 36(1), 27-43.
90. Kowal, P. & Dowd, J. (2001). Definition of an older person. Proposed working definition of an older person in Africa for the MDS Project. World Health Organization, Geneva, doi, 10(2.1), 5188.9286.
91. Kuniecki, M., Pilarczyk, J., & Wichary, S. (2015). The color red attracts attention in an emotional context. An ERP study.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,9. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00212
92. Lawrence, P. & McAllister, L. (2005). Marketing Meets Design: Core Necessities for Successful New Product Development: From the Special Issue Guest Editors. Journal of product innovation management, 22(2), 107-108.
93. Lawrenz, F. (2003). Evaluative Site Visits: A Methodological Review. The American Journal of Evaluation,24(3), 341-352. doi:10.1016/j.ameval.2003.08.003
94. Lee, C. & Coughlin, F. (2014). PERSPECTIVE: Older Adults Adoption of Technology: An Integrated Approach to Identifying Determinants and Barriers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 747-759.
95. Leitão, R. (2012). Creating mobile gesture-based interaction design patterns for older adults: a study of tap and swipe gestures with portuguese seniors. PhD Thesis Brisbane, Universidade do Porto.
96. Leung, H. & Savithiri, R. (2009). Spotlight on focus groups. Canadian Family Physician, 55, 218–219.
97. Lewis, J. & Sauro, J. (2009). The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale. Human Centered Design Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 94–103. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_12
98. Li, J., Nilsson, G., & Wu, J. (2004). Effects of age and anxiety on episodic memory: Selectivity and variability. 45(2), 123-129.
99. Lindenberger, U., Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (1993). Speed and intelligence in old age. 8(2), 207.
100. Lindsay, S., Jackson, D., Schofield, G., & Olivier, P. (2012). Engaging older people using participatory design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems.
101. Liu, R., Patel, N., & Kwon, M. (2017). Age-related changes in crowding and reading speed. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 8271.
102. Mao, J., Vredenburg, K., Smith, P., & Carey, T. (2005). The state of user-centered design practice. Communications of the ACM, 48(3), 105-109.
103. Mattila, K., Roto, V., & Hassenzahl, M. (2008). Now let's do it in practice: user experience evaluation methods in product development. Paper presented at the CHI'08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems.
104. McCleverty, A. (1997). Computer science 681: research methodologies. Ethnography.
105. Mccreadie, C. & Tinker, A. (2005). The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing and Society,25(01), 91-110. doi:10.1017/s0144686x0400248x
106. Mcgookin, D. & Brewster, S. (2004). Understanding concurrent earcons. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception,1(2), 130-155. doi:10.1145/1024083.1024087
107. McPhee, L., Scialfa, T., Dennis, W., & Caird, J. (2004). Age differences in visual search for traffic signs during a simulated conversation. Human factors, 46(4), 674-685.
108. Mead, S., Spaulding, V., Sit, R., Meyer, B., & Walker, N. (1997). Effects of age and training on World Wide Web navigation strategies. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting.
109. Melis, A., Soetens, E., & Molen, M. (2002). Process-Specific Slowing with Advancing Age: Evidence Derived from the Analysis of Sequential Effects. Brain and Cognition,49(3), 420-435. doi:10.1006/brcg.2001.1508
110. Micheli, P., Jaina, J., Goffin, K., Lemke, F., & Verganti, R. (2012). Perceptions of industrial design: The “means” and the “ends”. Journal of product innovation management, 29(5), 687-704.
111. Miranda, P., Isaias, P., & Crisóstomo, M. (2011). Evaluation of expert systems: the application of a reference model to the usability parameter. Paper presented at the International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction.
112. Moallem, A. (2005) Disadvantages of Cognitive Walkthrough. Retrieved from https://studylib.net/doc/7244628/disadvantages-of-cognitive-walkthrough
113. Motti, L., Vigouroux, N., & Gorce, P. (2013). Interaction techniques for older adults using touchscreen devices: a literature review. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 25th Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine.
114. Moynihan, G., Suki, A., & Fonseca, D. J. (2006). An expert system for the selection of software design patterns. Expert Systems, 23(1), 39-52.
115. Mynatt, E. & Rogers, A. (2001). Developing technology to support the functional independence of older adults. 27(1), 24-41.
116. Navabi, N., Ghaffari, F., & Jannat, Z. (2016). Older adults’ attitudes and barriers toward the use of mobile phones. Clinical interventions in aging, 11, 1371.
117. Nebeling, M., Speicher, M., & Norrie, M. (2013). W3touch. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 13. doi: 10.1145/2470654.2481319
118. Nevins, J. & Whitney, D. (1989). Concurrent design of products and processes: a strategy for the next generation in manufacturing: McGraw-Hill Companies.
119. Newell, A., Gregor, P., Morgan, M., Pullin, G., & Macaulay, C. (2010). User-Sensitive Inclusive Design. Universal Access in the Information Society,10(3), 235-243. doi:10.1007/s10209-010-0203-y
120. Nickerson, R. (1969). Man-computer interaction: A challenge for human factors research. Ergonomics, 12(4), 501-517.
121. Nielsen, J. & Faber, J. (1996). Improving system usability through parallel design. Computer,29(2), 29-35. doi:10.1109/2.485844
122. Nielsen, J. & Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
123. Nielsen. Introducing Boomers: Marketing's Most Valuable Generation.(2012, August). Retrieved from https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2012/introducing-boomers--marketing-s-most-valuable-generation.html
124. Nielsen: Global Consumers Highlight Opportunities For Retailers, Brand Marketers And Service Providers To Better Meet Needs Of Aging Consumers. (2014, Feburary).
Retrieved from https://www.nielsen.com/gh/en/press-room/2014/nielsen-global-consumers-highlight-opportunities-for-retailers-brand-marketers-and-service-providers-to-better-meet-needs-of-aging-consumers.html
125. Nieminen, M., Mannonen, P., & Turkki, L. (2004). User-centered concept development process for emerging technologies. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the third Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction.
126. Norman, D. & Draper, S. (1986). User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
127. Nussey, S. & Whitehead, S. A. (2001). Endocrinology: An integrated approach. Oxford: Bios Scientific Publ.
128. Nyrud, A. & Høibø, O. (2008). Evaluating customer preference for wooden deck materials with age effects. Paper presented at the of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics Lom, Norway, 6th-9th April 2008.
129. Olsina, L., Lafuente, G., & Rossi, G. (2001). Specifying quality characteristics and attributes for websites. In Web Engineering (pp. 266-278): Springer.
130. Orimo, H., Ito, H., Suzuki, T., Araki, A., Hosoi, T., & Sawabe, M. (2006). Reviewing the definition of "elderly". Geriatrics and Gerontology International,6(3), 149-158. doi:10.1111/j.1447-0594.2006.00341.x
131. Pardhan, S. (2004). Contrast sensitivity loss with aging: Sampling efficiency and equivalent noise at different spatial frequencies. Journal of the Optical Society of America A,21(2), 169. doi:10.1364/josaa.21.000169
132. Phiriyapokanon, T. (2011). Is a big button interfaceenough for elderly users?: Towards user interface guidelines for elderly users. Master thesis Mälardalen University Lambert Academic Publishing.
133. Pierotti, “Heuristic evaluation—a system checklist,” Tech. Rep., Xerox Corporation, Society for Technical Communication, 2005.
134. Piller, F. & Walcher, D. (2006). Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel method to integrate users in new product development. R&d Management, 36(3), 307-318.
135. Quigley, C. & Müller, M. (2014). Feature-selective attention in healthy old age: a selective decline in selective attention? Journal of Neuroscience, 34(7), 2471-2476.
136. Docampo, R. & Maria, M. (2001). Technology generations handling complex user interfaces. PhD Thesis Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
137. Rannikko, P. (2001) User-Centered Design in Agile Software Development. Retrieved from http://www.pirkkarannikko.com/agile-ucd.html
138. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., & Mckoon, G. (2003). A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on brightness discrimination. Perception & psychophysics, 65(4), 523-535.
139. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., & McKoon (2001). The effects of aging on reaction time in a signal detection task. 16(2), 323.
140. Rees, N. & Botwinick, J. (1971). Detection and decision factors in auditory behavior of the elderly. Journal of Gerontology, 26(2), 133-136.
141. Reginster, J. (2002). The prevalence and burden of arthritis. Rheumatology, 41(1), 3-6.
142. Rieman, J., Franzke, M., & Redmiles, D. (1995). Usability evaluation with the cognitive walkthrough. Paper presented at the Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems.
143. Rodríguez, M., Gonzalez, V., Favela, J., & Santana, C. (2009). Home-based communication system for older adults and their remote family. 25(3), 609-618.
144. Roebuck, J. (1979). When does" old age begin?: The evolution of the English definition. Journal of Social History, 12(3), 416-428.
145. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
146. Rogers, W., Cabrera, E., Walker, N., Gilbert, D., & Fisk, A. (1996). A survey of automatic teller machine usage across the adult life span. Human factors, 38(1), 156-166.
147. Sadika, F. (2018). Analysis of Product Design Development Process (Study Case Designer Dispatch Service Program from Ministry Of Trade Republic of Indonesia). 4(2).
148. Sarwar, M. & Soomro, R. (2013). Impact of Smartphone’s on Society. European journal of scientific research, 98(2), 216-226.
149. Scariot, A., Heemann, A., & Padovani, S. (2012). Understanding the collaborative-participatory design. 41(Supplement 1), 2701-2705.
150. Schieber, F. (1992). Aging and the senses. In Handbook of Mental Health and Aging (Second Edition) (pp. 251-306): Elsevier.
151. Silva, P. & Nunes, F. (2010). 3 x 7 Usability testing guide- lines for older adults. Proceedings of the 3rd Mexican Workshop on Human Computer Interaction.
152. Simon, K. (2018) Digital In 2018: World’S Internet Users Pass The 4 Billion Mark. We Are Social. Retrieved from https://wearesocial.com/blog/2018/01/global-digital-report-2018
153. Smith, A. (April 3, 2014). Older Adults and Technology Use. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/
154. Solesio, E., Lorenzo, L., Gutiérrez, R., López, M., Ruiz, M., & Maestú, F. (2011). Age effects on retroactive interference during working memory maintenance. 88(1), 72-82.
155. Sonar, R. & Mehta, S. (2007). An Application Development Framework Using Expert System Approach. ICISIM-2007, Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd, 20-30.
156. Speicher, M., Both, A., & Gaedke, M. (2015). S.O.S.: Does Your Search Engine Results Page (SERP) Need Help? Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 15. doi: 10.1145/2702123.2702568
157. Statista. Number of smartphones sold to end users worldwide from 2007 to 2017 (in million units). (2018). Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/
statistics/263437/global-smartphone-sales-to-end-users-since-2007/
158. Steele, R., Lo, A., Secombe, C., & Wong, K (2009). Elderly persons’ perception and acceptance of using wireless sensor networks to assist healthcare. 78(12), 788-801.
159. Stößel, C. & Blessing, L. (2010). Mobile device interaction gestures for older users. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries.
160. Sydow, L. (Janurary, 2017). 2017 Retrospective: A Monumental Year for the App Economy. App Annie. Retrieved from https://www.appannie.com/en/insights/market-data/app-annie-2017-retrospective/#download
161. Symon, R. & Dangerfield, K. (1980). Application of design to cost in engineering and manufacturing. Paper presented at the NATO AGARD Lecture Series.
162. Tan, J. (2009). FOUUX: A Framework for Usability & User Experience. PhD Thesis Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.
163. Taylor, R., Bower, A., Girosi, F., Bigelow, J., Fonkych, K., & Hillestad, R. (2005). Promoting health information technology: is there a case for more-aggressive government action? , 24(5), 1234-1245.
164. Tetzlaff, L. & Schwartz, D. R. (1991). The use of guidelines in interface design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
165. Tinker, M. (1935). Illumination intensities for reading. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 18(11), 1036-1039.
166. B. Tognazzini. (2006). First Principles of Interaction Design. Retrieved from: http://www.asktog.com/basics/firstPrinciples.html
167. Touron, D. & Hertzog, C. (2004). Distinguishing age differences in knowledge, strategy use, and confidence during strategic skill acquisition. Psychology and Aging, 19(3), 452.
168. Tran, J., Trewin, S., Swart, C., John, B., & Thomas, C. (2013). Exploring pinch and spread gestures on mobile devices. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services.
169. Trinh, T. (2009). Do older consumers differ from younger consumers in their attitudes, information sources and store choice in the Australian clothing retail market? Paper presented at Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, University of South Australia, pp. 1-8.
170. Tsai, W., Rogers, W., & Lee, C. (2012). Older adults’ motivations, patterns, and improvised strategies of using product manuals. 6(2), 55-65.
171. Tun, A., O'kane, G., & Wingfield, A. (2002). Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychology and Aging, 17(3), 453.
172. Ulrich, E. (1995). Product design and development. McGraw Hill.
173. Ungar, J. & White, J. (2008). Agile user centered design: enter the design studio-a case study. Paper presented at the CHI'08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
174. United Nations.Total Population - Both Sexes. (2007). .Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/
175. Van Someren, M., Barnard, Y. & Sandberg, J. (1994). The think aloud method: a practical approach to modelling cognitive. Paper presented San Diego, CAAcademic Press.
176. Veiel, L., Storandt, M., & Abrams, R. (2006). Visual search for change in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 21(4), 754.
177. Veryzer, W. & Borja, B. (2005). The impact of user‐oriented design on new product development: An examination of fundamental relationships. Journal of product innovation management, 22(2), 128-143.
178. Vuong, L. (2014). Enhancing smartphone’s usability for elderly in Finland. Master Thesis Degree program in Business Information Technology.
179. Wacharamanotham, C., Hurtmanns, J., Mertens, A., Kronenbuerger, M., Schlick, C., & Borchers, J. (2011). Evaluating swabbing: a touchscreen input method for elderly users with tremor. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
180. Walker, N., Philbin, D., & Fisk A. (1997) "Age-related differences in movement control: Adjusting submovement structure to optimize performance", Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences 1997 52B(1) 40-52
181. Walsh, K. & Callan, A. (2011). Perceptions, preferences, and acceptance of information and communication technologies in older-adult community care settings in Ireland: A case-study and ranked-care program analysis. 36(1), 102-122.
182. Wang, D., Xiang, Z., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2016). Smartphone use in everyday life and travel. Journal of travel research, 55(1), 52-63.
183. Woolhead, G., Calnan, M., Dieppe, P., & Tadd, W. (2004). Dignity in older age: what do older people in the United Kingdom think? , 33(2), 165-170.
184. Yamamoto, M. & Lambert, D. (1994). The impact of product aesthetics on the evaluation of industrial products. Journal of Product Innovation Management: An International Publication Of The Product Development & Management Association, 11(4), 309-324.
185. Yeh H. (2009). Elderly People’s Use of and Attitudes Towards Assistive Devices. PhD Thesis Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
186. Zachhuber, D., Grill, T., Polacek, O., & Tscheligi, M. (2012). Contextual Wizard of Oz. Paper presented at the International Joint Conference on Ambient Intelligence.
187. Zhou, Y., Yang, P., & Wang, S. (2014). Research of Kansei Image Based on Product Appearance Form Deconstruction. Advanced Materials Research, 971-973, 1316–1320. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.971-973.1316
188. Zimmerman, D. & Akerelrea, C. (2002). A group card sorting methodology fordeveloping informational web sites. Paper presented at the Professional CommunicationConference, 2002. IPCC 2002. Proceedings. IEEE International.