Advertisement

Smart TV for Older Adults: A Comparative Study of the Mega Menu and Tiled Menu

  • Xiwen Ouyang
  • Jia Zhou
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10927)

Abstract

Navigation in a hierarchical menu on the current smart TVs (STVs) contributes to a poor user experience for older adults. Difficulty with navigation is caused by the design of an interface and users’ mental models. To explore different design possibilities, two types of menu layouts (i.e., mega menus and tiled menus) with tags were designed in this study. An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of menu layouts on the user experiences of older adults. A manipulation check of both menu layouts was conducted via eye tracking. To understand users’ mental models, a card sorting method with a path diagram was employed. Thirty older adults were recruited in this experiment. The results indicated that a mega menu can reduce the physical effort of pressing keys, whereas a tiled menu achieves higher satisfaction of older adults. However, the mental model similarity between designers and older adults toward mega menus and tiled menus exhibited no significant difference. Older adults with high spatial ability had mental models that were similar to the mental models of designers.

Keywords

Older adults Smart TV Navigation Mega menu Tiled menu 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by funding from the Chongqing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (cstc2016jcyjA0406) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants nos. 71661167006).

References

  1. 1.
    Nielsen, J., Loranger, H.: Prioritizing Web Usability. Pearson Education, London (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ingrosso, A., Volpi, V., Opromolla, A., Sciarretta, E., Medaglia, C.M.: UX and usability on smart TV: a case study on a T-commerce application. In: Nah, F.F.-H., Tan, C.-H. (eds.) HCIB 2015. LNCS, vol. 9191, pp. 312–323. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20895-4_29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang, J., Zhou, J., Wang, H.: Older adults’ usage of web pages: investigating effects of information structure on performance. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) ITAP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9193, pp. 337–346. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20892-3_33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ziefle, M., Bay, S.: How to overcome disorientation in mobile phone menus: a comparison of two different types of navigation aids. Hum. Comput. Interact. 21(4), 393–433 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2104_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norman, D.A.: The psychopathology of everyday things. In: Readings in Human–Computer Interaction, pp. 5–21. Elsevier (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arning, K., Ziefle, M.: Effects of age, cognitive, and personal factors on PDA menu navigation performance. Behav. Inf. Technol. 28(3), 251–268 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290701679395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhou, J., Rau, P.-L.P., Salvendy, G.: Use and design of handheld computers for older adults: a review and appraisal. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 28(12), 799–826 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2012.668129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsu, Y.-c.: The effects of metaphors on novice and expert learners’ performance and mental-model development. Interact. Comput. 18(4), 770–792 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2005.10.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ziefle, M., Bay, S.: Mental models of a cellular phone menu. comparing older and younger novice users. In: Brewster, S., Dunlop, M. (eds.) Mobile HCI 2004. LNCS, vol. 3160, pp. 25–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28637-0_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xie, B., Zhou, J., Wang, H.: How influential are mental models on interaction performance? exploring the gap between users’ and designers’ mental models through a new quantitative method. Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2017, 14 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chin, J., et al.: Age differences in information search: an exploration-exploitation tradeoff model. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. SAGE Publications Sage CA, Los Angeles, CA (2015). 10.1177/1541931215591018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mo, F., Zhou, J., Yi, S.: Adapting the navigation interface of smart watches to user movements. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 33(6), 460–474 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1279826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nielsen, J.: Mega menus work well for site navigation (2009). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/mega-menus-work-well/
  14. 14.
    Ravendran, R., MacColl, I., Docherty, M.: Usability evaluation of a tag-based interface. J. Usability Stud. 7(4), 143–160 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kalbach, J.: Designing Web navigation: optimizing the user experience. O’Reilly Media Inc, Sebastopol (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rice, M., Alm, N.: Designing new interfaces for digital interactive television usable by older adults. Comput. Entertain. 6(1), 6 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1350843.1350849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tedesco, D., Tullis, T.: A comparison of methods for eliciting post-task subjective ratings in usability testing, in Usability Professionals Association (UPA), pp. 1–9 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pak, R., Price, M.M.: Designing an information search interface for younger and older adults. Hum. Factors 50(4), 614–628 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X312314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gong, Y.: Manual of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Chinese Version. Chinese Map, Changsha (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringChongqing UniversityChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations