Slashdot Mirror
How Bad User Interfaces Can Ruin Lives
Lauren Weinstein writes: A couple of months ago, in "Seeking Anecdotes Regarding 'Older' Persons' Use of Web Services," I asked for stories and comments regarding experiences that older users have had with modern Web systems, with an emphasis on possible problems and frustrations. I purposely did not define "older" — with the result that responses arrived from users (or regarding users) self-identifying as ages ranging from their 30s to well into their 90s (suggesting that "older" is largely a point of view rather than an absolute). Before I began the survey I had some preconceived notions of how the results would appear. Some of these were proven correct, but overall the responses also contained many surprises, often both depressing and tragic in scope. The frustration of caregivers in these contexts was palpable. They'd teach an older user how to use a key service like Web-based mail to communicate with their loved ones, only to discover that a sudden UI change caused them to give up in frustration and not want to try again. When the caregiver isn't local the situation is even worse. While remote access software has proven a great boon in such situations, they're often too complex for the user to set up or fix by themselves when something goes wrong, remaining cut off until the caregiver is back in their physical presence.
The user interface of the THERAC-25 had a great deal to do with allowing the massive radiation overdoses to happen. For instance, the machine allegedly reported an error that could mean EITHER "radiation dose too high" or "radiation dose too low" to an operator, while indicating an underdose. The operator repeatedly told the machine to deliver more radiation, not knowing that the machine was actually delivering a massive overdose to the victim (who later died).
http://users.csc.calpoly.edu/~jdalbey/SWE/Papers/THERAC25.html
In my spare time I pay visit to local elders and from them I have heard plenty of horrible anecdotes of how a change, no matter how minuscule that might be, might have a detrimental effect to some of the users - especially the elders
For example - for years there was a service whereby the older people can call up, and a human operator will answer. If the older people needs something that service would try to find people / resources to help out
That went on many years without problems and many elders, especially those staying alone, rely on the service
Then suddenly someone decide to save some money by installing an auto attendant, where callers must listen to some options and then dial a particular number for a particular task
For young people there should be no problem - but for older people where many have problem listening, and hand-eye coordination ability are no longer 'sharp', that auto attendant thing puts off many of the elderly
Couple with it the audio script that was badly scripted (long-winded and without clear roadmap), and was read by someone with a very lousy accent
Many of the elders have told me that they stopped calling that service because to them 'it's a torture'
In short - a UI change, no matter how minor it might seem, may whack some severe blows to users whose ability are not as sharp as others
First, this survey was not mainly about grandmothers. They had "ages ranging from their 30s to well into their 90s," and "a vast number of responses involved highly skilled, technologically-savvy individuals -- often engineers themselves."
The overwhelming complaints were of:
- "low-contrast interfaces and fonts, gray fonts on gray backgrounds"
- "Hidden menus. Obscure interface elements (e.g., tiny upside-down arrows). Interface and menu elements that only appear if you've moused over a particular location on the display. Interface elements that are so small or ephemeral that they can be a challenge to click even if you still have the motor skills of youth."
- "the sudden change of an icon from a wrench to a gear, or a change in a commonly used icon's position"