*4.1.1 Features of good design*

One of the most cited 'good' technology examples is the iPad. From the ergonomic and design perspectives, iPad and other 'good' designs have all or most of the following features:


**65**

*Attitudes and Behaviours in Relation to New Technology in Transport and the Take-Up…*

older people. There are lessons here for all design of technology.

The 'good' technology can encourage engagement as it offers independence, allows the user to understand what they are doing and the needs it will meet. It does not require any special expertise or skills and its navigation elements are completely clear. Evidence is pointing towards some new technologies being poorly designed and not meeting many of these criteria, thus making them distinctly unattractive to

Inclusive Design is based on an explicit understanding of users, tasks, and environments, who are involved throughout the design and development stages. User-centred evaluation drives and refines the design (e.g. Kansei engineering);

In addition, design must take into account Norman's [69] main principles:

• Conceptual models – the designer's model of how the user perceives the operation of the device or technology, if there is none, we make up our own.

• Mapping – relationship between the controls and the resulting effects.

• Feedback – showing the effect of every action: is the effect immediately

• Affordance – appropriate actions, provide clues to how the technology is

Engaging older people with new and emerging technologies is fundamental. As the proportion of older people grows, there will be a concomitant increase in those people with functional decline, who will have specific needs at a personal level. People with mild but undiagnosed dementia will have different needs to those with some physical incapacities. We need to establish the design parameters of how technology can be bespoke and easily operationalised to meet user needs. For example, algorithms can and should be developed to take the user towards those functions they need and to direct them away from what they do not want or need, thus reducing over-functionality- a much-cited dis-benefit of technology. A particular and potentially problematic issue for design is that solutions for one disability may present problems for another. Only inclusive, user-centred and participatory design can respond to this challenge and has the additional benefit in designing services

What needs to **change** is the way the design process works, involving older people on an inclusive basis, with consultative teams of older people with mixed levels of tech-savviness to ascertain the types and depths of need, the prototypes developed for trial uses, with feedback and a repeated iterative process until the older users are content. Every Government should produce a Code of Practice

• Constraints – lead to inappropriate actions, difficult to use, choices

obvious? Visual is not enough may need auditory.

and products usable by those with the lowest tech-savviness.

operated, and define how it will be used.

*4.1.3 Engaging older people with new technology.*

constrained.

• Visibility – the technology must show its functions to the user, "if instruction is

and the process is iterative, i.e. design-prototype-test-modify repeated.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94963*

*4.1.2 Inclusive design and Norman's principles*

needed the design has failed".

*Attitudes and Behaviours in Relation to New Technology in Transport and the Take-Up… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94963*

The 'good' technology can encourage engagement as it offers independence, allows the user to understand what they are doing and the needs it will meet. It does not require any special expertise or skills and its navigation elements are completely clear. Evidence is pointing towards some new technologies being poorly designed and not meeting many of these criteria, thus making them distinctly unattractive to older people. There are lessons here for all design of technology.

### *4.1.2 Inclusive design and Norman's principles*

*Models and Technologies for Smart, Sustainable and Safe Transportation Systems*

ness are critical in technology acceptance.

unlikely to meet any needs as yet unidentified.

structure such that related things are together;

• Large keypad or touchpoints to avoid making errors;

• Simple to use for easy and common tasks in plain language;

• Straightforward visualisation or complexity is not at all evident;

• Embedded reversibility and tolerance principle to allow easy corrections

• Built-in feedback available so the user is informed of actions or changes;

• Maintaining consistency with purpose so the user does not have to rethink and

*4.1.1 Features of good design*

through *undo* and *redo*;

• Visible options without distraction;

• Tolerating varied inputs and sequences; and

following features:

• Poorly designed keypads. A major problem for old people particularly is that keypads of some digital devices are too small for accurate operation.

• Complex interfaces. Complexity may introduce errors and slow them down. If the interface has jargon and unfamiliar symbols as well as too many choices, this will put off many people. Perceived ease of use as well as perceived useful-

• Counter-intuitive or difficult navigation. Today's older people were born and grew up in the analogue, not binary, world. For a digital interface to be intuitive to them, the design proposition must come from their more analogueoriented point of view. "Users often leave web pages in 10-20 seconds if they do not see a clear value" [68]. Features like flashing and alternating pictures that

make websites aesthetically pleasing are often at a cost of usability.

products there is more functionality than most people ever need.

• Over-functionality. 'Design for design's sake': the evidence shows that on many

• Lack of support in relation to technical issues. Many older people are dependent on a friend or relative to help in set-up and support; without these, many more older people would become lapsed users. In addition, for technologies purchased for the long term, there is also a concern associated with 'upgrades'.

• Trust and belief. Not meeting current needs leads to sceptical views on being

One of the most cited 'good' technology examples is the iPad. From the ergonomic and design perspectives, iPad and other 'good' designs have all or most of the

• Natural and intuitive navigation and transaction with a clear and consistent

**64**

remember.

Inclusive Design is based on an explicit understanding of users, tasks, and environments, who are involved throughout the design and development stages. User-centred evaluation drives and refines the design (e.g. Kansei engineering); and the process is iterative, i.e. design-prototype-test-modify repeated.

In addition, design must take into account Norman's [69] main principles:


### *4.1.3 Engaging older people with new technology.*

Engaging older people with new and emerging technologies is fundamental. As the proportion of older people grows, there will be a concomitant increase in those people with functional decline, who will have specific needs at a personal level. People with mild but undiagnosed dementia will have different needs to those with some physical incapacities. We need to establish the design parameters of how technology can be bespoke and easily operationalised to meet user needs. For example, algorithms can and should be developed to take the user towards those functions they need and to direct them away from what they do not want or need, thus reducing over-functionality- a much-cited dis-benefit of technology. A particular and potentially problematic issue for design is that solutions for one disability may present problems for another. Only inclusive, user-centred and participatory design can respond to this challenge and has the additional benefit in designing services and products usable by those with the lowest tech-savviness.

What needs to **change** is the way the design process works, involving older people on an inclusive basis, with consultative teams of older people with mixed levels of tech-savviness to ascertain the types and depths of need, the prototypes developed for trial uses, with feedback and a repeated iterative process until the older users are content. Every Government should produce a Code of Practice

relating to the design of technology being user-centred to promote simple, intuitive, adaptable and possibly adaptive human machine interactions to meet individual users' needs.
