designing adaptive interfaces for children

1

Towards Designing Adaptive interfaces for Children

Studying the effect of Age and Gender in the context ofDialoguing with computers

Mohan Raj RajamanickamDr. Charlotte TangProfessor Joanna McGrenere

2

Motivation

Design Adaptive interfaces for children

•Age and Gender differences   

3

Motivation

Design Adaptive interfaces for children

•Age and Gender differences   

4

Motivation

Design Adaptive interfaces for children

•Age and Gender differences   

5

Motivation

Design Adaptive interfaces for children

•Age and Gender differences

•Not just usable 

6

Motivation

Design Adaptive interfaces for children

•Age and Gender differences

•Not just usable•Developmentally

appropriate

7

Overview

2 studies

195 children = 111 + 84

Age 3 to 128 design factors

8

Setup

9

Setup

10

Setup

11

First study

Explore general difficulties + interaction differences

12

Gender differences

Observed behaviour Girls Boys

Distracted from painting activity Less More

Struggled to come up with an idea to paint Less More

Tendency to create the painting from scratch More Less

Used pre-existing drawing components Less More

Inclined to seek help from adults More Less

Time spent on study session Less More

Explored features of the software Less More

Style of reading text on dialog boxes Thorough Casual

Speed of interaction with dialogs Slower Faster

13

Categorize by Age

Group Ages Label1 3, 4, 5 Pre-literate2 6, 7 Semi-literate3 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 Literate

14

Problems with Dialogs by Age groupsProblems with

dialog boxAge group

Pre-literate Semi-literate Literate

Causality Why did it appear all of a sudden?

Hindrance Why is it stuck?

Affordance What is it doing here?

Communication What is it saying?

Consequence What should I do now?

Patience Whatever...

15

Design factors

To fix problems with dialogs

16

Design factors

1. Color coding

17

Design factors

1. Color coding2. Highlighting

18

Design factors

1. Color coding2. Highlighting3. Split structure

19

Design factors

1. Color coding2. Highlighting3. Split structure4. Safer arbitrary

choices• I don’t know 

20

Design factors

1. Color coding2. Highlighting3. Split structure4. Safer arbitrary

choices• I don’t know• Delayed-

click

21

Design factors

1. Color coding2. Highlighting3. Split structure4. Safer arbitrary

choices• I don’t know• Delayed-

click5. Visibility of

body text, title

22

Second study

Goal: Informally evaluate the designs

23

Color coding

• Disruptive options clicked slower • Helped pre-literates• Negative interaction with age– Pre-literates + 30%– Semi-literates - 8%– Literates - 98%

24

Highlighting

• Sped up clicking on safer option• Weaker cue• Weaker interaction with age– Pre-literates + 23%– Semi-literates + 28%– Literates - 36%

• Girls unaffected, boys benefited

25

Split structure

• Children indifferent• Older children faster– Boys faster, Girls slower– Spatial processing

26

Safer Arbitrary choices

• “I don’t know” + Delayed-click = more clicks

• Frequency increases over last revealed button

• Children disliked waiting

27

Visibility of body text, title

• Children indifferent to missing text• Text visible– Pre- and semi-literates slower– Literates faster

28

Summary of findingsDesign factor Age groups Gender

Pre-literates

Semi-literates

Literates Boys Girls

Split-structure

Visibility of body text, title

Color coding buttons

Highlighting

Delayed-click

29

Preliminary theories

On information consumption

30

Information channelsConsumption Textual channel Non-textual channel

Speed High Low

Accuracy High Low

Reliability High Low

31

Model of info. consumption

32

Design implications

Towards designing adaptive interfaces for children based on age,

gender

33

Design implications - Gender

Girls• Primarily Textual info

– Reading ability– Patience– Thorough

• Non-textual cues optional

• Spatially coherent structures

Boys• Fast & easy consumption• Non-textual cues

– Color coding– Highlighting

34

Design implications - Age

Pre-literates• Primarily non-textual cues

– Biggest benefactors• Color coding• Highlighting

– Worst performance without

• Minimal text– Encourage learning– Parents

Semi-literates• Both text and non-textual

– Key words

Literates• Text without cues

– Process text well– Poorly with non-textual

– Stronger cues

35

Future work

• Controlled study• Icon research• Touch screens

36

THANK YOUThat is all folks!