Collecting Old People’s Data for More Accessible Design: A Pilot Study

  • Weining NingEmail author
  • Hua Dong
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9193)


Good design should be equipped with the quality of being accessible to broad user groups, including older people. As the population becomes older, the needs and capabilities of people become ever more diverse. However, there exists limited effective data for designers to understand older people’s capability condition. The lack of good data becomes a great barrier to make design accessible to older people. This paper introduces a pilot study of collecting older people’s multiple capability data in China. It aims to explore principles and instructions to design the process, methods and testing tasks of such a study. The results show that in the pilot study, (1) there are discrepancies between users’ self-assessment and performance measurement, (2) the selection of products should take into account the cultural context, and (3) ceiling effects exist and they greatly affect the validity and reliability of the data.


Accessibility Inclusive design Multiple capability Data collection 


  1. 1.
    Langdon, P., Johnson, D., Huppert, F., Clarkson, P.J.: A framework for collecting inclusive design data for the UK population. Appl. Ergon. 46, 318–324 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johnson, D., Clarkson, J., Huppert, F.: Capability measurement for inclusive design. Eng. Des. 21(2–3), 275–288 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neerincx, M.A., Cremers, A.H., Kessens, J.M., van Leeuwen, D.A., Truong, K.P.: Attuning speech-enabled interfaces to user and context for inclusive design: technology, methodology and practice. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 8(2), 109–122 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nickpour, F., Dong, H.: Designing anthropometrics! requirements capture for physical ergonomic data for designers. Des. J. 14(1), 92–111 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sharma, V.: Importance of anthropometric research in developing regional accessibility standards. Newsletter of Design for ALL Institute of India, pp. 69–81 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stephanidis, C., Savidis, A.: Universal access in the information society: methods, tools, and interaction technologies. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 1(1), 40–55 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Tenneti, R., Johnson, D., Goldenberg, L., Parker, R.A., Huppert, F.A.: Towards a capabilities database to inform inclusive design: experimental investigation of effective survey-based predictors of human-product interaction. Appl. Ergon. 43(4), 713–726 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fors, S., Thorslund, M., Parker, M.G.: Do actions speak louder than words? self-assessed and performance-based measures of physical and visual function among old people. Eur. J. Ageing 3(1), 15–21 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Milanović, Z., Pantelić, S., Trajković, N., Sporiš, G., Kostić, R., James, N.: Age-related decrease in physical activity and functional fitness among elderly men and women. Clin. Interv. Aging 8, 549 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Daltroy, L.H., Larson, M.G., Eaton, H.M., Phillips, C.B., Liang, M.H.: Discrepancies between self-reported and observed physical function in the elderly: the influence of response shift and other factors. Soc. Sci. Med. 48(11), 1549–1561 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blalock, S.J., DeVellis, B.M., DeVellis, R.F., Sauter, S.V.H.: Self-evaluation processes and adjustment to rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 31(10), 1245–1251 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lorish, C.D., Abraham, N., Austin, J., Bradley, L.A., Alarcon, G.S.: Disease and psychosocial factors related to physical functioning in rheumatoid arthritis. J. Rheumatol. 18(8), 1150–1157 (1991)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McDowell, I., Newell, C.: Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. Oxford University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen, K., Chan, A.H.S.: The ageing population of China and a review of gerontechnology. Gerontechnology 10(2), 63–71 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhou, J., Rau, P.L.P., Salvendy, G.: Age-related difference in the use of mobile phones. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 13(4), 401–413 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Arning, K., Ziefle, M.: Barriers of information access in small screen device applications: the relevance of user characteristics for a transgenerational design. In: Stephanidis, C., Pieper, M. (eds.) ERCIM Ws UI4ALL 2006. LNCS, vol. 4397, pp. 117–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jones, S., Fox, S.: Generations Online in 2009. Pew Internet & American Life Project, New York (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Design and InnovationTongji UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations