Working Towards Fostering Programming Acceptance in the Everyday Lives of Older and Adult People with Low Levels of Formal Education: A Qualitative Case Study

  • Sergio SayagoEmail author
  • Angel Bergantiños
  • Paula Forbes
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


With the ever-increasing development of digital technologies, understanding their acceptance or rejection is important. A great deal of research, led by the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), shows that technology acceptance is a hot and complex topic. Much of it has been quantitative and operationalized within mandatory—workplace/organizational—contexts, where instrumental aspects of technology use (e.g., efficiency and productivity) play a central role. In this chapter, we report on a qualitative case study—based on 3 in-person learning courses—of factors that can help us foster programming acceptance in the everyday lives of older and adult people with low levels of formal education. We discuss the relative relevance of technology acceptance constructs, showing that perceived ease-of-use is much less relevant than perceived usefulness, because all participants had to find the fit of programming in their lives. We show that two social aspects—the figure of the course instructor and the group—were key to introduce programming and encourage decision-making. We also discuss some methodological issues, such as the difficulties in asking validated items of TAM (e.g. “I have the knowledge necessary to use the system”) to our participants.



We are indebted to l’Escola d’Adults de la Verneda—St. Martí, l’Associació de Participants Àgora, and to all our lovely participants, for their interest in the project and allowing us to collaborate with them, share their views and opinions in publications related to our research, and for helping us to keep learning more about the ‘older’ side of digital technologies. We also acknowledge the outstanding tasks carried out by Pau Blanco, Irene Sainz, Rosa Lloret and Mª Jesús Quesada in the 3D courses. We thank Josep Blat and Mireia Ribera for their comments on earlier versions of the chapter. We acknowledge the support from the Barcelona city council.


  1. All you need is code (2018). Accessed 10 Nov 2018
  2. Ames M, Bardzell J, Bardzell S et al (2014) Making cultures: empowerment, participation, and democracy—or not? In: CHI 2014 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (CHI EA 2014), pp 1087–1092Google Scholar
  3. Benbasat I, Barki H (2007) Quo vadis, TAM? J Assoc Inf Syst 8(4):211–218Google Scholar
  4. Brown N, Wilson G (2018) Ten quick tips for teaching programming. PLoS Comput Biol 14(4):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen K, Chan, AHS (2011) A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology 10(1):1–12Google Scholar
  6. Chilana P, Singh R, Guo P (2016) Understanding conversational programmers: a perspective from the software industry. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2016), pp 1462–1472Google Scholar
  7. Chuttur M (2009) Overview of the technology acceptance model: origins, developments and future directions. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, vol 9Google Scholar
  8. Code Week (2018). Accessed 20 Nov 2018
  9. Comunello F, Mulargia S, Belotti F et al (2015) Acceptance of ICTs by older adults: a review of recent studies. In: ITAP (international conference on human aspects of IT for the aged population), pp 239–249Google Scholar
  10. Davis FD (1986) A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Díaz P, Pipek V, Ardito C et al (2015) End-user development. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  12. Dougherty D (2012) The maker movement. Innovations 7(3):11–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guo P (2017) Older adults learning computer programming: motivations, frustrations, and design opportunities. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2017), pp 7070–7083Google Scholar
  14. Kafai Y, Burke Q (2014) Connected code: why children need to learn programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaptelinin V, Nardi B (2006) Acting with technology: activity theory and interaction design. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachussetsGoogle Scholar
  16. Lindtner S, Bardzell S, Bardzell J (2016) Reconstituting the utopian vision of making. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2016), pp 1390–1402Google Scholar
  17. Marangunić N, Granić A (2015) Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univ Access Inf Soc 14(1):81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meissner J, Vines J, McLaughlin J et al (2017) Do-it-yourself empowerment as experienced by novice makers with disabilities. In: Proceedings of the 2017 conference on designing interactive systems (DIS 2017), pp 1053–1065Google Scholar
  19. Montfort N (2016) Exploratory programming for the arts and humanities. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. Peek S, Wouters E, van Hoff J et al (2014) Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics 83(4):235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rogers E (2003) Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Rogers Y, Marshall P (2017) Research in the wild. Morgan & Claypool, USAGoogle Scholar
  23. Shein E (2014) Should everybody learn to code? Communications of the ACM 57(2):16–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. TIOBE index (2018). Accessed 10 Nov 2018
  25. Venkatesh V (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory. MIS Q 36(1):157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB et al (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang Q, Sun X (2016) Investigating gameplay intention of the elderly using an extended technology acceptance model (ETAM). Technol Forecast Soc Chang 107:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio Sayago
    • 1
    Email author
  • Angel Bergantiños
    • 1
  • Paula Forbes
    • 2
  1. 1.Universitat de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Abertay UniversityScotlandUK

Personalised recommendations