October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn 20081 Access Technology Acceptance and Adoption Katherine Deibel University of Washington.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Context For Inclusion:
Advertisements

Overview How the change is implemented is critical for the successful adoption of new information resources Review several models and concepts for managing.
Encouraging enterprise Moving towards a zero-waste society Developing a capable population Fostering resilient communities Advancing global citizenship.
Copyright © 2004 Sherif Kamel Technology Acceptance Model Sherif Kamel The American University in Cairo.
Special Education Referral and Evaluation Process Presented by Lexington Special Education Staff February 1, 2013.
Developmentally Appropriate Practice
The Adult UK sight loss pathway and the role of the local society Jenny Pearce Chair of VISION 2020 Rehab and Low Vision Group and Trustee of Thomas Pocklington.
1 Design, Prototyping, and Evaluation in Developing Countries Jen Mankoff, Assistant Professor EECS.
User Interfaces 4 BTECH: IT WIKI PAGE:
1 Copyright © 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole.
What is Diffusion? The process of communicating innovation through certain channels over time through members of a social system.
Vygotsky Additional Guided Participation. Sociocultural Activity Guided participation is a particular type of scaffolding studied by Rogoff et al. (1995).
Strategies for Managing Change - regarding the adoption/use of R4L Resources.
[A SSISTIVE ] T ECHNOLOGY A DOPTION AND A BANDONMENT Katherine Deibel Computer Science and Engineering University of Washington, Seattle.
Why don’t innovation models help with informatics implementations? Rod Ward University of the West of England Medinfo 2010.
Adoption of Assistive Technologies for Reading Disabilities: Cultural, Literacy, and Technological Aspects Katherine Deibel University of Washington Generals.
Week 16 Technology Adoption Model
CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn 2008 October 20, Access Technology for Reading Disabilities Katherine Deibel University of Washington October.
Katherine Deibel Computer Science & Engineering
Attributes of Innovations How the properties of an innovation affect their rate of adoption.
CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn October 20, 2008 Promoting Adoption and Diversity in Access Technologies for Adults with Reading Disabilities.
Assessment of Systems Effort Factors Functionality Impact Factors Functionality Interface Usability What it does Collection Value to task Effectiveness.
Chapter 7 design rules.
CSEP 590 B Accessibility, Autumn Access Technology for Reading Disabilities Katherine Deibel University of Washington October 20, 2008 Access Technology.
Promoting Social Acceptance With greater emphasis on inclusion, general education teachers are expected to make provisions for students who have difficulties.
©2007 Prentice Hall Organizational Behavior: An Introduction to Your Life in Organizations Chapter 19 OB is for Life.
Diffusion of Innovation How New Ideas, Practices, and Technologies Spread Content from
Wanda Y. Wade. Advanced Organizer Consequences Types of Social Skills Identifying deficits When Planning Looks of Social Skills Interventions Must Haves.
Diffusion of Innovations Theory Tyra JanssonTyra Jansson H571 Principles of Health BehaviorH571 Principles of Health Behavior.
Consumer Influence Word-of-Mouth Communication Opinion Leadership Diffusion of Innovations.
1. Human – the end-user of a program – the others in the organization Computer – the machine the program runs on – often split between clients & servers.
Principles of User Centred Design Howell Istance.
WHAT ROLE DO BOTH THE PEOPLE IN ONE’S LIFE AND ONE’S OVERALL ENVIRONMENT PLAY IN HUMAN LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT?
Diffusion of Innovations Gerontology 820 Ashley Waldoch October 18, 2010.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © The Homework Effect: Does Homework Help or Harm Students? Katherine Field EdD Candidate, Department.
INTRODUCTION Drawing on personal experience, an in-depth exploration of one novice PT’s journey through her first year of practice, and current educational.
DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION Mary Lynn Manns, PhD
Presentation of Findings, Communication and Utilization of Findings.
THE PERSONNEL AND PROCEDURES OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Chapter 2.
4/12/2007dhartman, CS A Survey of Socially Interactive Robots Terrance Fong, Illah Nourbakhsh, Kerstin Dautenhahn Presentation by Dan Hartmann.
CHAPTER 12 Developing New Market Offerings. NOTION OF A PRODUCT A product is that which is offered to the market (consumer) to meet an identified need.
…from Census to Survey: a framework for the development of extended question sets for use on surveys Mitch Loeb USA Washington Group on Disability Statistics.
Researchers in Europe without Barriers, April th 2009 Postdoctoral Research Careers Project.
Tiffany Harrell “The goal for every student is to learn, but not every child learns in the same way.” (Firchow, 2011)
Identifying the Impacts of Technology Transfer Beyond Commercialization FPTT National Meeting, June 12, 2007.
Human Computer Interaction CITB 243 Chapter 1 What is HCI
Diffusion of Innovation
Diffusion of innovations September 9, Diffusion of Innovations Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th edition). New York, NY: Free.
Diffusion of innovation Theory and concepts. Diffusion of Innovation Everett Rogers (1995) defined innovation diffusion as ‘the process by which an innovation.
The experiences of the local schools and districts included suggest the following guidelines for effective home-school partnerships: There.
Health Education in the Community
Today.. Overview of my realist synthesis Reflections on the process
Google Apps for Education Presentation to the Board of Education Sarita Ivey.
SEVERE DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES Kathy Rivas November 13, 2014.
Lesson 1 Technology and Computers. Objectives Define technology Understand the history of technology and its impact on society Define computer Recognize.
Utilizing Small Groups in Large ESL Classes Dr. Bruce Kreutzer International University, HCMC.
Diffusion of innovation Everett M. Rogers. It is a theory called Diffusion of Innovation invented by Everett Rogers.
Department of Specialized Instruction & Student Services Strategic Plan – Initiative 1.
Wiki Use In Education By Dona Sisk EDUC 8841 Dr. Foley Walden University Spring 2010.
1 Design and evaluation methods: Objectives n Design life cycle: HF input and neglect n Levels of system design: Going beyond the interface n Sources of.
Best Practices and Compliance
UNICEF/WG MODULE ON INCLUSIVE EDUCATION
The case study of guided exploratory urban planning tours and site visits via a mobile learning application TDF Project “The City as a Classroom” Hai-Ning.
Technology and Computers
Diffusion of Innovation Theory
Diffusion of Innovation
Quick Facts about Disability
Diffusion of Innovation
Diffusion of Innovation
Diffusion of Innovation
Presentation transcript:

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Access Technology Acceptance and Adoption Katherine Deibel University of Washington

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Defining Adoption & Acceptance – Technology Adoption / Rejection: The process by which an individual or group decides to use / not use a technology on a regular basis – Technology Acceptance: The process by which an individual or group grows to accept a technology as a common or correct way of doing a task

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn A Question What has been the most successful access technology of all time?

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn History of Eyeglasses – China, ≈1 C.E.: As eye protection – Italy, 1260s: For farsightedness – Europe, 1500s: For nearsightedness – Britain, 1725: Modern frame invented – USA, 1780s: Bifocals invented – Britain, 1825: For astigmatisms

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Social Acceptance of Eyeglasses – Generally viewed as not to be worn in public – Use only when necessary – “Glasses are very disfiguring to women andgirls” — From a 1901 optician journal – Led to quick use optics like the stylish monocle or lady’s lorgnette – Exceptions – The Spanish – Scholars, academics, and clergy – Result – Association of glasses with intellectual pursuits

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Point of this Historical Sidetrack – Culture and society shapes how, when, and if a technology is used – Technologies shape people’s perceptions of their users It’s All About The Context

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Outline – Why care about adoption and acceptance? – Theory of Adoption and Acceptance – Studies of AT Adoption and Acceptance – Considering Adoption when Designing

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Facts about Abandonment – Technology adoption is good for business – 8 to 75% of AT are abandoned after purchase – Average rate is 35% – Differs by technologies – Wheelchairs have low abandonment rates – Hearing aids have high abandonment rates

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Why Adoption Matters for AT – A tool is only helpful when it is used – Abandonment is a waste of resources, time, and funds for users and disability services – Leads to learned helplessness and pessimism – Usage patterns influence adoption of technologies by others

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Why Acceptance Matters for AT – Social acceptance of AT being used visibly – Lower stigma of being disabled – Encourages usage by others – Reduces challenges of using technology – In schools – At work – Non-acceptance can lead to disagreements and in-fighting – Cochlear implant and the Deaf community – Oscar Pistorius and the Summer Olympics 2008

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Outline – Why care about adoption and acceptance? – Theory of Adoption and Acceptance – Studies of AT Adoption and Acceptance – Considering Adoption when Designing

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Basic Ideas of Adoption-Acceptance – Models of information-gathering / processing in regards to new ideas or products – Studied mainly in Communication Sciences – Applied to numerous fields and areas: – Agriculture – Education – Health policies – Medicines – Computer technologies

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Models of Adoption-Acceptance – General – Rogers’s Diffusion of Innovations Model – Moore’s Crossing the Chasm – Davis and Bagozzi’s Technology Acceptance Model – AT-Specific – Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation – Kintsch and DePaula’s Adoption Framework for Assistive Technologies

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Diffusion of Innovations – Developed by Everett Rogers – Generalized theory of how ideas and innovations spread and get adopted – Codified terminology and methodology – Has needed modifications due to recent innovations in communication technologies

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Some Terminology – Adoption – Rejection – Abandonment – Discontinuance – Reinvention – Relative Advantage – Change Agent – Compatability – Perceived Ease of Use – Early Adopter

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn “Visible” Use of Technology – Knowledge and eventual adoption of technologies are guided by social and communication networks

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Adoption Rates & Early Adopters – Innovators:2.5% – Early Adopters: 13.5% – Early Majority:34% – Late Majority:34% – Laggards:16%

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Outline – Why care about adoption and acceptance? – Theory of Adoption and Acceptance – Studies of AT Adoption and Acceptance – Considering Adoption when Designing

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Studies of AT Adoption – Phillips and Zhao (1993) – Elkind et al. (1996) – Jeanes et al. (1997) – Wehmeyer (1995, 1998) – Martin and McCormack (1999) – Riemer-Reiss and Wacker (2000) – Koester (2003) – Dawe (2006) – Shinohara and Tenenberg (2007) – Comden (2007) – Deibel (2007, 2008)

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Methodologies and Approaches – Variety of methodologies: – Large-scale quantitative surveys (4) – Studies of a single assistive technology (4) – Small-scale qualitative case studies (3) – Different approaches – Focus on one or many technologies – Focus on one or many disabilities – Limitations: – Difficulty in generalizing smaller studies – Larger studies do not separate findings by technology or disability type

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Types of Disabilities ONE MANY ONE MANY Types of Assistive Technologies Study includes people with reading disabilities Study does NOT include people with reading disabilities Studies of AT Adoption

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Findings – Predictors of technology adoption – Involvement of user in selection process – Observable performance benefit – Ease of maintenance and configuration – Understanding of what the technology does – Predictors of technology rejection – Monetary cost of technology – Limited knowledge of available technologies – Learning curves for using technologies – Technology lifetimes

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Outline – Why care about adoption and acceptance? – Theory of Adoption and Acceptance – Studies of AT Adoption and Acceptance – Considering Adoption when Designing – Dawe’s Studies – King’s Human Factors – Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Melissa Dawe’s Work – Dissertation at U. Colorado-Boulder – Mobile communication system for young adults with severe cognitive disabilities – Study Approach: – In-depth interviews with parents, teachers, and caretakers of young adults with severe CDs – Motivation: – Capture full process of abandonment – Capture any re-invention of regular technologies – Recognize multiple stakeholders in the purchase and usage of the technology

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Thomas King’s Human Factors – Special educator and speech-language pathologist – Focus on augmentative and alternative communication systems – Years of experience in selection and advising of AT usage – Many AT failures begin at the design stage

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Essential Human Factors – Device Transparency – Cosmesis of Devices – Mappings of commands and actions – Affordances – Learned helplessness – Feedback from controls – Knowledge in the head versus knowledge in the world – Constraints on device usage – Fail-safe mechanisms – Error prevention

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Highlights of Human Factors – Cosmesis – Cosmetic appeal of the appearance of the AT – Affordances – Luxury or comforts provided by design of the machine – Knowledge in the head or the world – Degree of learning needed to use the device – Degree to which interface helps guide the operation of the device

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation – Heuristic for determining if an AT will be used to conduct a task – Developed by Bruce Baker – Readapted by Thomas King Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Time + Effort

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Time + Effort Time to Complete Usage Desire or need to complete a task

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Time + Effort Physical + Cognitive Baker’s breakdown of Effort

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Baker’s Basic Ergonomic Equation Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Time + Effort Physical + Cognitive + Linguistic King’s breakdown of Effort

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn BBEE: A Question Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Time + Effort If motivation is high and the device requires minimal time and effort… …will a person necessarily use the AT?

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn BBEE: Answer YES… …BUT WHY?

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Invisibility of Reading Disabilities – Disability not visually apparent to others – Allows individual to hide as “normal” – Avoid disability stigma – Limit knowledge to trusted others – Delay asking for help (including registering for disability services and accommodations) – Motivation for hiding – Poor reading skills associated with low intelligence – Teasing from peers – Expectations from others to fail – Accusations of faking

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn BBEE: Capturing Stigma Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Stigma +Time + Effort Perceived harm from using the device

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn BBEE: Another Question Likelihood of Usage = Motivation Stigma +Time + Effort With even a really high stigma association… …would some still use the AT?

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Consider Wheelchairs – Stigmas associated with using a wheelchair – Lowered perceived intelligence “What will your friend be having for dinner? – Ignored from conversations “Is your wife crippled” “No, she’s just lazy. You can ask her yourself.” – Alternatives to using a wheelchair? – Crutches or walkers (not always an option)? – Staying at home forever? – Futuristic robotic skeletons?

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn BBEE: Necessity of Device Likelihood of Usage = Necessity  Motivation Stigma +Time + Effort Criticality of device for the task

October 20, 2008CSEP 590 B, Accessibility, Autumn Summary – Adoption and usage of a technology is influenced by more than what it does well – AT adoption and acceptance are critical concerns for AT researchers and developers – Some design guidelines and tools exist – Further studies of issues particular to specific disabilities are needed