Kennedy

133
-1

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
133
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • http://www.fisher-price.com/us/playtime/games/infantGames_animalfun.asp
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXV-yaFmQNk
  • http://www.childrenslibrary.org/icdl/SimpleSearchCategory?ids=&langid=&pnum=1&cnum=1&text=&lang=English&ilang=English
  • Kennedy

    1. 1. BeccaKennedyAdvanced HF12/8/11DESIGNINGTECHNOLOGY FORCHILDREN
    2. 2.  How children function differently from adults Cognitive Development Sensory and Perceptual Development Motor Development Designing interfaces for different age groups Sensorimotor stage Preoperational stage Operational stage Concrete Operational stage Involving children in the design process General QuestionsOVERVIEW
    3. 3.  How is designing technology for children differentthan designing technology for adults?THE ULTIMATE QUESTION
    4. 4. HOW CHILDREN FUNCTION DIFFERENTLYFROM ADULTS
    5. 5.  Information Processing Speed Improves as the child learns to guide their own attention (Berk,2005, p. 333) and working memory capacity increases Working memory Is limited to about two items in 2.5-year-olds and five items in7-year-olds (Kail, 2003) Increased rate of rehearsal and better mnemonic strategies aschildren age Spatial Ability When preschoolers are shown a map of their classroom andasked to place stickers to show location of objects and people,they have more difficulty when the map is rotated (Liben &Downs, 1993)COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
    6. 6.  Critical period for visual development is between twoand six months of age (Dunsing & Kephart, 1966) Visual search (Gerhardstein, Kraebel, Gillis, & Lassiter, 2002) Parallel processing functions similarly for children andadults Serial processing is less efficient for children than adultsSENSORY AND PERCEPTUALDEVELOPMENT
    7. 7.  2 yrs. - can manipulate smallobjects 3-4 yrs. - can use scissors 5-6 yrs. - can write words 7-8 yrs. - can draw pictures withsome depth cues Slower information processingspeed also affects motor skillsbecause children are slower toadjust movements (Thomas, 1980)FINE MOTOR DEVELOPMENT
    8. 8. DESIGNING FOR DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS
    9. 9.  Sensorimotor Stage (ages 2 and under) Child learns about world from experiencing consequencesof physical actions Preoperational Stage (ages 3 – 6) Child can think in images and symbols; egocentric Concrete Operational Stage (ages 7 – 11) Child can use logic appropriately; can classify objects Formal Operational Stage (ages 11+) Child can think abstractly, beyond concrete experiences;this stage continues until adulthoodPIAGET’S STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT
    10. 10.  Should require little interaction from the child Novel and eye-catching events (e.g., colors andflashing) can attract attention (Richard & Holley, 1999) Can use alternative interfaces besides screen-based E.g. Neurosmith Music BlocksDESIGN FOR SENSORIMOTOR STAGE(AGES 2 AND UNDER)
    11. 11.  Fisher-Price Animal Fun GameGAMES FOR 2-YEAR-OLDS AND YOUNGER
    12. 12.  Instructions should be auditory or depicted throughpictures (cannot assume literacy) Targets should be larger than what is necessary foradults (Hourcade, Bederson, Druin, & Guimbretiere, 2004) Icons should be large and conspicuous Interfaces should not require drag-and-dropinteractions, but point-and-click instead (Inkpen, 2001) Navigation can be aided by literal icons (a houseimage to go “home”) and directional images (arrowsfor moving between pages)DESIGN FOR PREOPERATIONAL STAGE(AGES 3 – 6)
    13. 13.  Fisher-Price Healthy Food GameGAMES FOR 3- TO 6-YEAR-OLDS
    14. 14.  Children under age 10 still have difficulty processinga large number of choices (Piaget, 1970), sonavigation choices should be limited to five or fewer(Meloncon, Haynes, Varelmann, & Groh, 2010) Because of limited WM capacity, children benefitfrom interfaces requiring recognition rather thanrecall of information (Schneider, 1996) Children at this stage can function independentlyand can usually use a mouse and keyboard easilyDESIGN FOR CONCRETE OPERATIONALSTAGE (AGES 7 – 11)
    15. 15.  Club Penguin – online role-playing game involving avirtual world of penguin avatarsGAMES FOR 7- TO 11-YEAR-OLDS
    16. 16. GAMES FOR 7- TO 11-YEAR-OLDS
    17. 17. GAMES FOR 7- TO 11-YEAR-OLDS
    18. 18.  Similar cognitive abilities to adults Can focus on minimizing cognitive load, especially foreducational resources Challenge for designers is capturing interest Children may find technology boring or insulting if it isdesigned “too young” for them (Gilutz & Nielsen, 2002)DESIGN FOR FORMAL OPERATIONALSTAGE (AGES 11+)
    19. 19.  Starcraft II – real time strategy game Very fast-paced Requires planning , strategy, high concentration, and dexterityGAMES FOR 11+ YEAR OLDS
    20. 20.  Club Penguin’s warning about saving the passworddoes not assume the child has a complete existingmental model of computer safety Metaphorical conceptual models that are easilyunderstood by adults may not be understood bychildren (e.g., the floppy disk icon) Consider the child’s existing knowledge Any other examples? Is there a good way around this?DESIGNING FOR THE MENTAL MODEL OFTHE CHILD
    21. 21.  Video Did the iPad influence thebaby’s expectation for how amagazine should behave? Or is the baby interacting withthe magazine the same wayshe would if she had neverused an iPad?TO A BABY, A MAGAZINE IS AN IPAD THATDOES NOT WORK
    22. 22. INVOLVING CHILDREN IN THE DESIGNPROCESS
    23. 23.  Druin (2002) described four possible roles thatchildren can play in the design process of newtechnologies User – interact with existing technologies but have no directinput on its design Tester – use technology in development and provide feedbackabout refinement before the technology is publically released Informant – interact directly with designers through interviewsand other research techniques, but designers decide how tointerpret the child’s feedback Design Partner – children and designers contribute equally inthe design processINVOLVING CHILDREN IN THE DESIGNPROCESS
    24. 24.  Druin (2005) advocates the involvement of childrenas design partners In the design of the International Children’s Digital Library,children provided input and critiques that were categorized andanalyzedINVOLVING CHILDREN IN THE DESIGNPROCESS
    25. 25.  Designed a new interface for International Children’sDigital Library “Flattened” the hierarchy to make it easier to navigate Simultaneous presentation of most popularcategories, rather than sequential Evaluated usage by 6- to 11-year-olds of conjunctiveBoolean queries (selection of multiple categorybuttons) Compared hierarchical structure and flat structureHUTCHINSON, DRUIN, & BEDERSON(2007)
    26. 26.  Children created more Boolean searches in the flatinterface For single-item searches, either flat or hierarchicaldesigns are useful For conjunctive Boolean searches, flat designs aremore useful What did you find interesting about this article?HUTCHINSON, DRUIN, & BEDERSON(2007)
    27. 27.  What do you think about the ICDL interface? Can digital children’s books through resources likethe ICDL replace hardcopy books? What kinds of difficulties might researchers facewhen working with children? Regarding parents? Regarding the use of video with usability studies? Regarding quality of children’s feedback?GENERAL QUESTIONS
    28. 28.  How might child ergonomics contribute to design oftechnology for children? What other areas of HF might benefit from makingdistinctions between adult and child users? How might improving technology benefit children inthe future? Do you think “technologizing” of childrencan be problematic?GENERAL QUESTIONS

    ×