This paper discusses six myths common in the field of ‘human-computer interaction (HCI) and older people’. These myths are widespread among computer scientists, engineers and programmers, as well as among the general public and even older individuals themselves. We can define these myths as follows. (1) Just wait and see. Future generations of older people will use computers without problems. This myth differs from those following, as it may lead to a (dangerous) conclusion of avoidance and inactivity by integrating myths 2–6. If the other myths are accepted as being true and one assumes that the problems will eventually solve themselves, it might not seem worthwhile to expend any effort on ‘universal design’ for older people’s use of information and communication technology (ICT). However, we argue that if we do not actively and properly counteract these myths, we will perpetuate them and their grave consequences. (2) Older people are not interested in using computers. They are unaware of computer capabilities. (3) Older people consider computers as useless and unnecessary. (4) Older people lack the physical capabilities to use ICT. (5) Older people simply cannot understand interactive computing technology. (6) You can’t teach an old dog new tricks. The problem of HCI for older people is that they do not learn to use new technologies and interaction techniques. In discussing these myths, we demonstrate that each one contains a grain of truth. However, the myths are improperly overgeneralized and, therefore, often wrong. Such myths are problematic. Designers and engineers often accept them as truths and neglect older users and/or apply information and communication technologies in an age-discriminating manner. Furthermore, the myths are problematic as they lead older people to avoid computer usage (i.e. a self-fulfilling prophecy). We present evidence to support the notion that these myths may often be largely – although not completely – wrong. We then demonstrate how they can be counteracted through user-centered design, training and instruction.

1.
Hanson VL: Age and web access: the next generation; in: Proceedings of the 2009 International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A), Madrid, April 2009. New York, ACM, 2009, pp 7–15.
2.
Prensky M: Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 2001;9:1–6.
3.
Brickfield CF: Attitudes and perceptions of older people toward technology; in Robinson PK, Livingston J, Birren JE (eds): Aging and Technological Advances. New York, Plenum, 1984, pp 31–38.
4.
Dyck JL, Smither JA: Age differences in computer anxiety: the role of computer experience, gender and education. J Educational Computing Research 1994;10:238–248.
5.
Czaja SJ, Charness N, Fisk AD, Hertzog Ch, Nair SN, Rogers WA, Sharit J: Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol Aging 2006;21:333–352.
6.
Weiser M, Brown JS: The coming age of calm technology; in Denning PJ, Metcalfe RM (eds): Beyond Calculation. New York, Copernicus, 1997, pp 75–85.
7.
Pohlmeyer AE, Blessing L, Wandke H, Maue J: The value of answers without question[s]. A qualitative approach to user experience and aging; in Kurosu M (ed): Human Centered Design, HCII 2009. Berlin, Springer, 2009, LNCS 5619, pp 894–903.
8.
Norman DA: The Design of Everyday Things. New York, Basic Books, 2002.
9.
Lee D, Kwon S, Chung MK: Effects of user age and target-expansion methods on target-acquisition tasks using a mouse. Appl Ergon 2012;43:166–175.
10.
Sandfeld J, Jensen BR: Effect of computer mouse gain and visual demand on mouse clicking performance and muscle activation in a young and elderly group of experienced computer users. Appl Ergon 2005;36:547–555.
11.
Fisk AD, Rogers WA, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J: Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches. London, CRC Associates, 2009.
12.
Poynton T: Computer literacy across the lifespan: a review with implications for educators. Comput Human Behav 2005;21:861–872.
13.
Sengpiel M: Young by design: supporting older adults’ mobility and home technology use through universal design and instruction; in Stephanidis C (ed): Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Berlin, Springer, 2011, LNCS 6767, pp 230–239.
14.
Hawthorn D: Possible implications of aging for interface designers. Interact Comput 2000;12:507–528.
15.
Chasteen AL, Bhattacharyya S, Horhota M, Tam R, Hasher L: How feelings of stereotype threat influence older adults’ memory performance. Exp Aging Res 2005;31:235–260.
16.
Marquié JC, Jourdan-Boddaert L, Huet N: Do older adults underestimate their actual computer knowledge? Behav Inf Technol 2002;21:273–280.
17.
Willis SL, Schaie KW: Cognitive training and plasticity: theoretical perspective and methodological consequences. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2009;27:375–389.
18.
Schmiedek F, Lövdén M, Lindenberger U: Hundred days of cognitive training enhance broad cognitive abilities in adulthood. Findings from the COGITO Study. Front Aging Neurosci 2010;2:27.
19.
Sayago S, Sloan D, Blat J: Everyday use of computer-mediated communication tools and its evolution over time: an ethnographical study with older people. Interact Comput 2011;3:543–554.
20.
Rogers WA, Fisk AD, Mead SE, Walker N, Cabrera EF: Training older adults to use automatic teller machines. Hum Factors 1996;38:425–433.
21.
Bruder C, Blessing L, Wandke H: Training the elderly in the use of electronic devices; in: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human Computer Interaction: Coping with Diversity. Berlin, Springer, 2007, pp 637–646.
22.
Struve D, Wandke H: Video modeling for training older adults to use new technologies. ACM Trans Access Comput 2009;2:1–24.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.