PsychNology Journal, 2006
`Volume 4, Number 3, pp. 267-284
`
`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile
`phones for older users
`
`Matthew Pattison(cid:1) and Alex Stedmon (cid:1)
`
`(cid:2)PDD, London, UK
`(cid:1)Human Factors Research Group, University of Nottingham, UK
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`This paper reviews the human factors requirements of mobile phones in order to facilitate
`inclusive design and provide older users with technological support that enhances their day-
`to-day lives. Particular emphasis is placed on whether human factors requirements are fully
`considered and meet the needs of older users. The scope of this review is necessarily wide
`including: human factors, gerontology, inclusive design, technology and design research
`methodologies. Initial consideration is given to understanding what it means to be an older
`user and the changes that occur with the aging process. Older user requirements are
`examined in relation to achieving inclusive design solutions and the way in which human
`factors methodology can be used to support inclusive design goals. From this standpoint,
`attention is given to the design of mobile phones, considering how human factors issues are
`reflected in product design and context of use beyond the phone handset to the wider
`interaction environment. This paper does not propose specific direction from primary
`research findings but argues for a ‘state of the union’ with regard to the current approaches
`designers and manufacturers adopt and the effects that design decisions have on potential
`end users. This paper argues that when effective and flexible human factors methodology
`and inclusive design ethos is integrated into the product development process global
`benefits to a wide user population can maximise inclusion as opposed to exclusion via
`technological advances.
`
`Keywords: Human factors, inclusive design, older users, mobile phones, cell of exclusion
`
`Paper Received 28/07/2006; received in revised form 31/10/2006; accepted 12/12/2006
`
`1. Introduction
`
`With approximately 25 million mobile phones in use by one in three of the UK
`population, mobile phones have developed at a considerable pace over the past 20
`years within the UK and throughout the world (The Stewart Report, 2000). With the
`increasing number of older users as a demographic group, this should mean that they
`
`(cid:1) Corresponding Author
`Matthew Pattison, Human Factors Specialist
`PDD Group Ltd.
`85-7 Richford Street
`London, W67HJ
`Tel:+442087351111
`Email: mattpattison@pdd.co.uk
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1031
`
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`present a large-scale user group of such technology. However, this is not the case as
`mobile phone design is skewed towards younger users. This may be due, in part, to
`techno-phobia which is an anxiety associated with using advanced technologies (Elder,
`Gardner, and Ruth, 1987; Hone, Graham, Maguire, Baber, and Johnson, 1998).
`Techno-phobia is correlated with age illustrating that older users are more reluctant to
`use new technology than younger users and could arise through poor user
`requirements capture where the design solutions do not meet the specific needs of
`older users.
`In a highly competitive marketplace, development of mobile phones is driven by
`consumer spending and problems can develop where the main consumer base
`becomes the main design focus because it is the main revenue platform. As a result,
`there is a danger that the development of mobile phones has not grown to support
`different users and that niche user groups have to ‘make do’ with what is generally
`available. This would seem to be the case for older users. However as the older
`population increases, so too does their power as a consumer group as they move out
`of being a niche user group and into being their own mainstream market sector (Lee
`and Kim, 2003).
`
`2. Older users: a growing consumer group
`
`Over the last 150 years the combination of reduced infant mortality and increased life
`expectancy has led to a restructuring of population demographics in the UK and across
`the developed world (Coleman, 2001). Population projections suggest that following the
`two post-war baby booms of the 20th Century, the older population will continue to
`expand during the first quarter of the 21st Century from 400 million to 1.3 billion by 2050
`(Summers, 2001).
`As users grow older and their requirements change, designers should be sensitive to
`their changing user needs as well as designing for the users they might eventually
`become themselves (Coleman and Pullinger, 1993).
`Older users may have a substantial command of income, with children grown up and
`with mortgages paid off, they can control a significant portion of the country’s wealth,
`saving and spending power (Lee and Kim, 2003). However, many older users are poor
`and struggle financially and/or physically in an environment that can enforce disability
`out of impairment1. Disability through impairment can refer to those at a disadvantage
`
`1(http://www.ricability.org.uk/reports/report-design/guidelinesforproductdesign/contacts.htm#4)
`
`268
`
`2
`
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`through a lack of resources and support. That users can be ‘disabled’ through poor
`design highlights the idea that users are often stifled by a restrictive, rather than de-
`restrictive, environment
`that surrounds them (Fisk, 1993). With various needs,
`technology should be designed to support older users through independent living and
`interaction rather than being alienated because they cannot use a mobile phone,
`access the internet or understand the latest graphic user
`interfaces (Mikkonen,
`Vayrynen,
`Ikonen, and Heikkila, 2002). Since the early 1990s this has been a
`fundamental concept in design education philosophies applied by leading authorities in
`the UK and across Europe such as the Helen Hamlyn Research Centre at the Royal
`College of Art, The Design Council, The Danish Centre for Assistive Technology, as
`well as leading research groups such as COST 219 investigating accessibility for all
`users to services and terminals for next generation networks.
`
`3. Older users: the performance continuum and aspects of aging
`
`Older users by definition have lived longer than younger users and therefore
`represent one of the most heterogeneous groups in society (Bullock and Smith, 1987).
`Assuming that people generally start at a similar point, born with similar functions and
`abilities, by the time they become older users they will have gathered many different
`experiences, perceptions and mental models of the world, as well as possibly suffered
`the rigours of physical and mental demise in various forms. From a similar starting
`point older users will have travelled and deviated further than other user groups and
`therefore be further away from design homogeneity.
`A performance continuum exists as a function of age in terms of vision, hearing,
`motor function and cognition.
`
`3.1. Vision
`Visual impairment takes many forms, from partial loss of vision through to complete
`blindness. Aging can be seen to affect older adults in many ways briefly highlighted
`below:
`
`Decreasing Visual acuity (the ability of the eye to discriminate detail) diminishes
`especially after 50 years of age (Haigh, 1993; Steenbekkers, Dirken, and Van
`Beijsterveldt, 1998). The average 60 year old requires three times more light than the
`average 20 year old to see the same level of detail (Haigh, 1993).
`
`269
`
`3
`
`(cid:127)
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`Decreased contrast sensitivity (the ability to distinguish between light and dark)
`diminishes from the age of 20 years to 80 years with the main decline beginning
`around 40 to 50 years.
`
`Worsening light accommodation (the ability to focus on near and far objects)
`decreases from the age of 8 to 50 years by roughly 50-55%, at which point the decline
`generally levels off. The decreased elasticity in the lens leads to a reduction in the
`accommodation and an average near point of 50cm for a 50 year old, compared to
`12.5cm for a 30 year old (Haigh, 1993, Ishihara, Ishihara, Nagamachi, and Osaki,
`2002).
`
`Difficulties with glare (which arises from harsh light leading to discomfort and/or
`disability). The scattering of light in the eye due to increasing lens opacity increases the
`effect of glare. With three times more light required (in relation to visual acuity), the
`increased likelihood of glare needs accounting for in design solutions for older users
`(Haigh, 1993).
`
`3.2. Hearing
`loss of hearing are most commonly
`As with vision, changes to or the gradual
`associated with aging. The process is affected by many factors such as work exposure,
`diet and genetic influences, but by the age of 50 there is often sufficient loss of hearing
`to cause impairment (Takeda, Morioka, Miyashita, Okumura, Yoshida, and Matsumoto,
`1992). Aging has also been shown to have an effect on the ability to interpret and
`respond to complex auditory information. The ability to discriminate frequency also
`deteriorates in a linear fashion between 25 to 55 years of age, after which a greater
`differential is required especially for the higher frequencies (Takeda et al., 1992).
`
`3.3. Motor Function
`Age related changes in hand/motor function appear to occur as a decrease in
`strength, dexterity and range (Steenbekkers et al., 1998). There is a decrease in grip
`strength and endurance with age, with force exerted deteriorating from the mid to late
`twenties (40% decline in strength from 30 to 80 years old) and the average 65 year old
`user having only 75% maximal strength (Sato and Fukuba, 2000).
`
`3.4. Cognitive aspects of aging
`In general, working memory appears not to decline in relation to storage capacity, but
`rather processing efficiency declines over time (Norris, Smith and Peebles, 2000).
`
`270
`
`4
`
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`Processing speed declines but recall stays within Miller’s 7 plus/minus 2 chunks (Miller,
`1956). Long-term memory declines with age in relation to episodic memory, however,
`semantic memory is maintained and deficits are rare (Bowles, 1993). In relation to
`procedural memory, decline is elevated with the complexity of task and reaction time
`has been shown to decline with age. Therefore memory retention for prior known faces
`and places can appear to be good if supported by contextual knowledge but new
`complex tasks can be problematic for older people. Total knowledge increases with
`age and so a larger database is available for older rather than younger people although
`speed of retrieval slows down. Older people maintain the ability to learn, with evidence
`of neural plasticity, however, the process takes more time, especially with complex
`material (Kandel, Schwartz, and Jessell, 2000). This could help explain techno-phobia
`if there is little or no prior context for older users to use in learning how to use new
`technologies or new technologies are not developed which support the mental models
`of older users.
`Skills such as vocabulary and language use are maintained unimpaired until late in
`life whereas skills that depend on rapid processing, accurate logical thought and spatial
`ability are markedly affected as people become older (Haigh, 1993). Evidence supports
`the theory that older people cope poorly with divided attention tasks and whilst
`problem-solving increases in capacity until the ages of 40 - 50 years, after this period
`an experiential related decline occurs (Norris et al., 2000).
`In relation to the performance continuum and the effects of aging, decline occurs
`throughout adult life. Most areas of decline vary greatly between individuals due to the
`heterogeneous nature of aging itself and the multitude of factors (such as such as
`lifestyle, health, nutrition, individual differences, work and exercise) that can impact on
`everyone growing older. In relation to mobile phone design the performance continuum
`is linked to human interaction with complex systems. On one level a mobile phone is a
`single device used by an individual
`interacting with a keypad, screen and simple
`interface. On another
`level a complex set of combined cognitive and physical
`interactions are linked to changing contexts of use and environments in which these
`mobile devices are used. The management of
`these interactions underpin how
`successful and accessible these mobile technologies are. The challenge for designers
`is that there is no typical older user to design for. What is required is a clear philosophy
`(such as inclusive design) and an approach (such as human factors) in order to
`develop user-centred solutions that meet older user needs. If this is achieved then
`
`271
`
`5
`
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`designers can target the design for a specific user group and provide an inclusive
`design solution.
`
`4. Inclusive design: incorporating the needs of older users
`
`for as many users as possible and therefore
`Inclusive design aims to cater
`incorporate diverse user requirements – it is more of a design philosophy than an end
`product. The underlying premise of this philosophy is that it should enable rather than
`exclude different users (Gyi, Porter, and Case, 2000). However,
`the aim is not
`necessarily to achieve a ‘universal’ solution but to be more pragmatic, supporting
`different users by forming generic design solutions that suit specific needs. A model of
`inclusive design is illustrated below in Figure 1 (adapted from Keates and Clarkson,
`2004).
`
`
`User NeedsUser Needs
`
`specify problem to be solvedspecify problem to be solved
`
`
`
`verify problem definitionverify problem definition
`
`
`User PerceptionUser Perception
`
`representation of the systemrepresentation of the system
`
`
`
`verify user perceptionverify user perception
`
`
`User CognitionUser Cognition
`
`structure the interactionstructure the interaction
`
`
`
`verify user understandingverify user understanding
`
`
`User Motor FunctionUser Motor Function
`
`quality of control and inputquality of control and input
`
`
`
`verify user comfortverify user comfort
`
`
`UsabilityUsability
`
`evaluation & validationevaluation & validation
`
`
`
`validate usability & accessibilityvalidate usability & accessibility
`
`Figure 1. Model of inclusive design (adapted from Keates and Clarkson, 2004)
`
`272
`
`6
`
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`The model highlights the complexity of inclusive design from analysing user needs
`through to evaluating and validating the usability of design solutions.
`In order to
`achieve this, user needs have to be understood in terms of:
`
`the representation of the design problem (taking user perception as a basis for
`the design);
`
`the interaction between the user and design solution
`the structure of
`(understanding that this will be different for different user requirements);
`
`the quality of control and input (as a basis of user comfort).
`
`If these aspects are addressed then the design solution should be accessible to
`users and therefore inclusive in its nature. If inclusive design is implemented at the
`start of the overall design process, design options can be evaluated in an iterative
`manner. For older users this could mean that specific user requirements are identified.
`By incorporating human factors methods,
`involving users and designers,
`to help
`develop and sustain inclusion throughout the design process this should also support
`the uptake and usability of actual products and services.
`
`5. Human Factors in Design research supporting inclusive design
`
`Human factors offers a ‘user-centred’ approach which ensures fit between the design
`and the users needs and requirements. For decades, various task analysis techniques
`(eg. Kirwan and Ainsworth, 1993; Militello and Hutton, 1998) have allowed human
`factors experts to describe the interactions between users, technologies and their
`environments at a level of detail that can be used to inform the design solution.
`Recognition of this has recently been formalised by the publication of International
`Standard ISO 13407, Human-Centred Design Processes for Interactive Systems
`(Earthy, Sherwood Jones, and Bevan, 2001) which specifies four general principles of
`user-centred design:
`
`ensure active involvement of users and a clear understanding of user and task
`requirements (including context of use and how users might work with future products);
`
`today’s
`allocate functions between users and technology (recognising that
`technology, rather than de-skilling users, can actually extend their capabilities into new
`applications and skill domains);
`
`ensure iteration of design solutions (by involving users in as many stages of the
`design process and implementation cycle as is practical);
`
`273
`
`7
`
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`ensure the design is the result of a multidisciplinary input (emphasising the
`importance of user feedback, but also stressing the need for input from such disciplines
`as design, marketing, ergonomics, software engineering, technical authors, etc).
`Without such a standard there is a risk of specifying or designing solutions that fail to
`support the users’ understanding of the target application (Stone, 2001). Advances in
`applied methodologies have increased the level of exposure between designers and
`end users. Techniques such as video ethnography (Hughes, O'Brien, Rodden,
`Rouncefield and Blythin, 1997) and audio/video diaries (Palen and Salman, 2002)
`prove very powerful tools to a design team or client in developing solutions based on
`user understanding, requirements and ultimately real use. Beyond the ‘exploration and
`understanding’ phase, older users can act as powerful participants in the design
`process. These individuals can often provide an innovative contribution to design
`thinking and solution creation via articulation of real needs and real experiences which
`the design team can use to develop conceptual solutions (Woodhuysen, 1993).
`Implementing human factors methods and data can be difficult or can be seen to
`stifle individual designer creativity. Good design features can sometimes occur by
`chance, or design teams are not able to involve users until near the end of the project
`(Etchell and Yelding, 2004). Designers often have to follow a strict design specification
`from their clients and can find anthropometric data difficult to implement due to its
`format being non-design centric (Gyi, Porter, and Case, 2000). Furthermore, holistic
`end user analyses are required in usability testing to achieve designs that really meet
`the needs of target user groups and these are not always factored into the design
`process (Tuomainen and Haapanen, 2003).
`Human factors specialists involved in the design process must seek to supply
`knowledge to designers to maximise assistance and education whilst minimising
`information overload by disseminating knowledge based on shared mental models
`(Hitchcock, et al., 2001). One such model is defined as the ‘Cell of Exclusion’ (Mitchell
`and Chesters, 2004). The cell is based on a cube metaphor with each face of the cube
`highlighting design boundaries and barriers to use. Indeed, it has also been referred to
`as the ‘inclusive design cube’ because by taking account of these barriers a more
`inclusive framework can be established (Keates and Clarkson, 2004). The cell of
`exclusion reflects the design dilemma based on both the user’s and society’s
`expectations which could be altered through inclusive design initiatives.
`
`274
`
`8
`
`(cid:127)
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`Figure 2. The ‘Cell of Exclusion’ (adapted from Mitchell and Chesters, 2004
`
`The four sides of the cube, or walls of the cell, are defined as: (1) a non-inclusive
`design process (which ignores the needs of specific users), (2) ignorance about
`barriers (which ignores the user requirements), (3) ignorance about the penalties of
`exclusion (design blindness to the effects of alienating user groups), and (4) absence
`of disability expertise in the design process (limited or non-existent specialist
`knowledge). The ceiling of the cell refers to society’s low expectation of the older user
`and the floor of
`the cell refers to the low expectations of
`the users themselves
`(perpetuated through the society’s lack of consideration for their needs). The ceiling
`and floor of the cell help explain techno-phobia as society has expectations for niche
`users to adapt to mainstream technologies whilst users may have severe doubts about
`how easy it is to learn to use new technologies.
`Relating this to mobile phone design, non-inclusive design factors refer to the implicit
`performance specifications based on the ability to see the screen, use the keypad with
`dexterity and conduct tasks within specific time limits (Mitchell and Chesters, 2004).
`Based on this, it should be relatively simple to design out such barriers based on a
`better understanding of inclusive design principles rather than penalising users based
`on their sometimes limited abilities (Mitchell and Chesters, 2004).
`
`275
`
`9
`
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`6. Mobile phones: ‘user-centred’ solutions for older users
`
`Mobile phone designs have evolved with younger users in mind, but access to mobile
`phone technology can offer the older user the opportunity to maintain their quality of life
`(see note 1) . Furthermore, as mobile and wearable technologies evolve they also offer
`tools for monitoring health (Dishman, 2004) and maintain social
`inclusion and
`community connectivity via networks such as the ‘message center’ (Wiley, Sung, and
`Abowd, 2006) Such communication solutions designed specifically for adults can
`integrate carers, older and younger user and sustaining independent
`lifestyles.
`However, as technology advances and becomes increasingly complex, older users are
`exposed to products and services which they are unfamiliar with and which can actually
`further isolate them if they are not designed to support their needs.
`Older users have identified a number of problems with mobile phones such as displays
`that are too small; buttons and keypads that are too difficult to use; too many functions;
`battery life too short; poor sound quality; and a preference for speech input (see http:
`www.nttdocomo.com/pr/2004/001207.html). All these issues can be directly mapped to
`the performance continuum effects discussed earlier. These issues of
`functional
`improvement may apply to all users to some degree and serve to highlight
`the
`importance of inclusive design in meeting not only older user needs but also assisting
`other users.
`The screen display of a mobile phone to many older users (or any other visually
`impaired user) presents a barrier to use with many phone handsets. Mobile phones are
`used in all environments and varied levels of illumination must be accommodated by
`screen and display design. Older users may suffer a deteriorating capacity to use
`miniature screens as optical accommodation rates weaken.
`Poor vision can be supported by tactile feedback such as the raised ‘5’ key, use of
`contrasting textures, and clear and consistent key pad layout. Alongside this, audible
`feedback can be provided from an audible ‘beep’ through to fully functioning speaking
`phones, such as the ‘Owasys 22C’ which provides audible text, numbers and phone
`functions (see note 1).
`Phone use in public areas can be susceptible to background noise which interferes
`with auditory input. The inability to distinguish complex sounds can often make
`communication increasingly difficult for older users and hearing aids can also affect
`mobile phones usage, causing audible interference which can range from being
`annoying to masking communication. Hearing deficits can also be supported in mobile
`
`276
`
`10
`
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`phones with the use of text, vibration warning and visual ringing, all providing non-
`audible feedback. The text phone or videophone offers solutions for the hard of hearing
`but can be exclusive due to the high price of such products (see note 1).
`The trend for miniaturisation of mobile phones has impacted on keypad size which
`has diminished significantly, resulting in a smaller physical interface (with smaller key
`pads and spacing). For the older user, coupled with impeded dexterity, the interface
`can restrict them, making it difficult view the keys or move between them easily. These
`factors can be further compounded in older users by muscular tremors or joint rigidity
`which impact on motor control. Inclusive design principles have assisted users with
`regard to hand function in fixed phone technology, by user-centred developments such
`as the ‘Big Button’ telephone by British Telecom which bases its design solution on the
`ease of use of large keys which are easy to read and use.
`Complex cognitive processes are increasingly required with multi-functional phones
`which do more than just allow the user to make mobile phone calls. The combination of
`memory and dexterity issues can often exclude users in timed responses systems
`where limited dial time is allowed to make the call and/or where the phone interface is
`difficult to use. The decreased reaction times of older users may leave them unable to
`exploit this technology to the full, unless it is designed with them in mind.
`One major problem for the older user is the lack of standardisation in interfaces which
`is an essential component in designing transferable usability across mobile phones.
`Technological change has been rapid and the increased complexity of new phones
`with less intuitive interfaces may require previous experience of earlier generation
`products in order to understand current designs. However, older users may not
`possess the requisite specialised prior knowledge where as younger users can rely on
`the mental models they have built up from using previous generations of technology.
`This is apparent not only when considering the move to using mobile phones rather
`than land-lines, but also with the difficulties experienced in changing from one brand of
`mobile phone to another. Brand specific differentiation causes barriers to use as users
`find it difficult to learn new operating procedures from the ones they are familiar with.
`The general effects of the aging process are summarised in Table 1 below and
`provide a basis for evaluating how current phones meet the needs of older users.
`
`277
`
`11
`
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`General effect on older users
`(cid:127) more light required
`(cid:127) ability to focus deteriorates
`(cid:127) ability
`to
`deal with
`diminishes
`
`glare
`
`Potential design solution
`
`improve illumination
`(cid:127) provide user interface options
`if a display is required, use anti-
`glare coatings to display
`
`Factor
`
`Vision
`
`Hearing
`
`Hand
`function
`
`Cognitive
`processes
`
`loss of sensitivity to higher
`frequencies
`(cid:127) general threshold deteriorates
`(cid:127) complex sounds more difficult to
`process
`
`(cid:127) general weakness (strength and
`grip)
`(cid:127) dexterity often impaired
`range of movement
`limited
`
`is more
`
`(cid:127) processing time – with working
`memory
`long term memory (episodic)
`reaction time
`learning time required
`(cid:127) problem solving capacity
`
`(cid:127) do not use high frequency
`audio feedback
`(cid:127) couple auditory feedback with
`visual or tactile feedback
`(cid:127) keep auditory
`feedback as
`simple as possible
`(cid:127) design casings that are easy to
`hold and keys so they are easy
`to press (oversized and/or easy
`press).
`(cid:127) group
`function.
`(cid:127) keep menu structures intuitive
`and consistent
`(cid:127) make user interfaces as simple
`as possible
`
`and
`
`keys
`
`by
`
`use
`
`Table 1. The effects of the aging and potential design solutions
`
`7. Mobile phones: design solutions for older users
`
`Whilst many mainstream phones do not cater for the older user, models are
`emerging that are designed with the older user in mind (even if not all of them are
`commercially available yet).
`The Design Business Association challenge winning ‘Ello’ phone minimised functions
`by providing a screen-free, large tactile button, ‘clam’ style handset that afforded clear
`visual contrast and graphics. As a concept phone it has not been produced
`commercially, but adopted simple to use memory functions, and programming with
`audio and visual feedback to provide a design solution based on inclusive design
`principles that produced a simple handset that affords ease of use.
`The ‘Mobi-Click’ phone, released in 2004 by Orange, affords ease of use (answering
`and hearing) with an integrated loud-speaker. As with the ‘Ello’ handset, this phone
`does not have a display and offers a very simple design with only three keys. However,
`although the interfaces is a simple and intuitive in design, it resembles a pendant alarm
`system for older users (such as the ‘Benefon Seraph’ which also has only three
`
`278
`
`12
`
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`(cid:127)
`

`

`Inclusive design and human factors: designing mobile phones for older users
`
`buttons), which places it at risk of falling into the specialist disabled equipment category
`rather than a standard phone with wider market appeal. By ignoring the ‘inclusive’
`principle of non-specialist requirements, the design does not cater for younger users
`who require a display and texting facilities.
`Another similar design is the ‘SilverPhone’ which has been designed to be more
`usable by older users than conventional mobile phones. Along with the ‘Ello’ and ‘Mobi-
`Click’, this phone does not have a screen and uses a limited set of three buttons. It is
`bought pre-programmed in order to make it ready to use and easy to begin using than
`many conventional mobiles, store 3 most important numbers and uses one touch input
`for simpler interactions. It has an in-built loud-speaker and can be used by blind or
`partially sighted users also. However, this phone has the aesthetic of a remote control
`handset not a contemporary phone and might have been simplified too much in trying
`to make technology ‘simple to use’ rather than ‘easy to use’.
`One of the smaller phone producers in Japan, Kyocera, have targeted older users
`with considerable success by releasing the ‘Tu–Ka S’ phone. The handset is modelled
`on a standard handset very much like a wireless landline handset (and therefore fits
`with a common mental model of a standard phone which older users are more
`comfortable with). Like the other phones, it does not have a display and therefore has a
`long battery life. The keys are large with simple colour coding and good contrast. In
`emphasising the product slogan ‘no manual needed’, all aspects have a simple,
`intuitive, functional design that affords ease of use. Due to mapping onto a common
`mental model of a standard phone, this handset should be usable by a range of users
`with varying abilities and therefore could have wider appeal than just the older user
`market. Similar
`trends have seen to the move towards mapping contemporary
`technology with traditional interface design with the contemporary version of the old
`fashioned Roberts radio (RD50 DAB/FM radio) being a good example of new
`technology packaged within an older mental model underpinning the context of use.
`At the high end of the market NTT DoCoMo released the ‘Foma Raku-Raku’ phone
`aimed at users unfamiliar with mobile phone technology. This phone uses image-based
`instructions for task ‘walkthrough’ and a read aloud element for a wide variety of
`functions in order to make the learning process as easy as possible. As with the ‘Ello’
`handset,
`it
`is a ‘clam’ style phone with good battery life however visually it
`is
`problematically styled in non-contrasting silver perhaps making it difficult to identify
`specific keys.
`
`279
`
`13
`
`

`

`M. Pattison, A. Stedmon
`
`Tu–Ka also present the TS41 ‘Bone Phone’ based on technology that transmits
`sound via the skull, thus increasing the efficiency of sound transmission. Previously this
`technology has only been used for fixed lines with older users in mind but is now
`proving popular to young businessmen who are working outside whilst
`they talk,
`illustrating how different design solutions can migrate across different user groups,
`broadening the market share and fulfilling many user requirements.
`These phones seek to address issues faced by the older user with varying degrees of
`success and emphasis on inclusive design. In so doing, many design solutions focus
`on the immediate physical design of the handset (incorporating different aspects of
`visual, auditory, dexterity and tactile based limitations).
`Focus on designing for context of use and wider environments or settings prove more
`of a challenge. Speed of processing skills, memor