Effectiveness and Usability of a Developed Collaborative Online Tool for Children with ADHD

  • Doaa SinnariEmail author
  • Paul Krause
  • Maysoon Abulkhair
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 265)


This study evaluated the effectiveness and usability of a developed collaborative online tool (chit-chat) for children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). We studied whether this tool influenced children’s Knowledge and experience exchange, motivation, behavioral abilities and social skills while using another learning tool, ACTIVATE. A total of seven Saudi children with ADHD aged from 6 to 8 years were assigned to the collaborative intervention using iPads. They were asked to play mini games that positively affect children with ADHD cognitively and behaviorally, then chat using our developed collaborative online tool, for three sessions. Progress points were measured and quantitatively analyzed before and after the intervention, thematic analysis was applied on the qualitative data. Participants showed improvements in overall performance when using the learning tool ACTIVATE. E-collaboration was found to be effective to children with ADHD and positively influencing their knowledge, experience, motivation and social skills.


ADHD E-collaboration Effectiveness Usability 


  1. Ali, A., Puthusserypady, S.: A 3D learning playground for potential attention training in ADHD: a brain computer interface approach. In: 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), pp. 67–70. IEEE, August 2015Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A.: Human agency in social cognitive theory. Am. Psychol. 44(9), 1175 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barajas, A.O., Al Osman, H., Shirmohammadi, S.: A serious game for children with autism spectrum disorder as a tool for play therapy. In: 2017 IEEE 5th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), pp. 1–7. IEEE, April 2017Google Scholar
  4. Bul, K.C., et al.: Development and user satisfaction of “Plan-It Commander”, a serious game for children with ADHD. Games Health J. 4(6), 502–512 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clarke, V., Braun, V.: Thematic analysis. In: Michalos, A.C. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology, pp. 1947–1952. Springer, New York (2014). Scholar
  6. Drigas, A., Kokkalia, G., Lytras, M.D.: ICT and collaborative co-learning in preschool children who face memory difficulties. Comput. Hum. Behav. 51, 645–651 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DuPaul, G.J., Stoner, G.: ADHD in the Schools: Assessment and Intervention Strategies. Guilford Publications, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  8. Fiers, J.: The effects of peer tutoring on math fact fluency of elementary students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Doctoral dissertation, Western Illinois University (2017)Google Scholar
  9. Genlott, A.A., Grönlund, Å.: Closing the gaps – improving literacy and mathematics by ICT-enhanced collaboration. Comput. Educ. 99, 68–80 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holt, S., Yuill, N.: Tablets for two: how dual tablets can facilitate other-awareness and communication in learning disabled children with autism. Int. J. Child-Comput. Interact. 11, 72–82 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huang, C.S., Su, A.Y., Yang, S.J., Liou, H.H.: A collaborative digital pen learning approach to improving students’ learning achievement and motivation in mathematics courses. Comput. Educ. 107, 31–44 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Järvelä, S., et al.: Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 63(1), 125–142 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Klingberg, T., et al.: Computerized training of working memory in children with ADHD-a randomized, controlled trial. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 44(2), 177–186 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kroesbergen, E.H., Van Luit, J.E., Maas, C.J.: Effectiveness of explicit and constructivist mathematics instruction for low-achieving students in the Netherlands. Elementary Sch. J. 104(3), 233–251 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., Hakkarainen, K.: Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-support collaborative learning. Learn. Instr. 13, 487–509 (2003). Scholar
  16. McHale, T.J.: Delayed maturation of neuropsychological abilities in ADHD: a developmental comparison between children, adolescents, and adults. Doctoral dissertation (UMI No. 3449435), Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA (2010)Google Scholar
  17. McKnight, L.: Designing for ADHD in search of guidelines. In: IDC 2010 Digital Technologies and Marginalized Youth Workshop (2010)Google Scholar
  18. Nielsen, J.: Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users. NNGroup, Nielsen Norman Group, USA (2000). Accessed 02 Jan 2017
  19. Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Raskind, M., Margalit, M., Higgins, E.: “My LD’’: children’s voices on the internet. Learn. Disabil. Q. 29(4), 253–268 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rief, S.F.: How to Reach and Teach Children and Teens with ADD/ADHD. Wiley, Hoboken (2016)Google Scholar
  22. Ronimus, M., Kujala, J., Tolvanen, A., Lyytinen, H.: Children’s engagement during digital game-based learning of reading: the effects of time, rewards, and challenge. Comput. Educ. 71, 237–246 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sinnari, D., Krause, P., Abulkhair, M.: Effects of e-games on the development of Saudi Children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder cognitively, behaviourally and socially: an experimental study. In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds.) Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Methods, Technologies, and Users. LNCS, vol. 10907, pp. 598–612. Springer, Cham (2018). Scholar
  24. Tsuei, M.: Mathematics synchronous peer tutoring system for students with learning disabilities. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17(1), 115–127 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. Van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R.L., Simons, P.R.J.: Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educ. Res. Rev. 20, 24–34 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vasalou, A., Khaled, R., Holmes, W., Gooch, D.: Digital games-based learning for children with dyslexia: a social constructivist perspective on engagement and learning during group game-play. Comput. Educ. 114, 175–192 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wilkes-Gillan, S., Cantrill, A., Cordier, R., Barnes, G., Hancock, N., Bundy, A.: The use of video-modelling as a method for improving the social play skills of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and their playmates. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 80(4), 196–207 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xie, L., Antle, A.N., Motamedi, N.: Are tangibles more fun? Comparing children’s enjoyment and engagement using physical, graphical and tangible user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, pp. 191–198. ACM, February 2008Google Scholar
  29. Yee, N.: Motivations for play in online games. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 9, 772–775 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and Physical SciencesUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK
  2. 2.Information Technology DepartmentKing Abdulaziz University (KAU)JeddahKingdom of Saudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations