David Nandigam
Judith Symonds
Nicola Kayes
Kathryn McPherson
MOBILE PHONE USER INTERFACE
DESIGN FOR PATIENTS WITH
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY
The 11th Annual ACM SIGCHI NZ Conference on Computer-Human Interaction
8 July 2010 — Massey University, Auckland, NZ
Background & Motivation



Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading
causes of death and life-long disability.
Goal Management Training (GMT) is a therapy that
teaches strategies in order to improve an
individual's ability to complete everyday tasks
The current project proposes using mobile phone as
a tool to augment Goal Management Training
(GMT) with people after TBI.
Scope
Questions Explored



Can we use a mobile phone available off-the-shelf?
If so, which type most meets the divergent
requirements of individual users?
If not, do we have to develop a mobile phone
interface with custom features?
Cell-phone Attributes
Choi et al.(2005) identify key factors in the selection of a mobile
Eisenstein et al. phone : screen size, size of menu items or
(2001)
buttons, and presentation structure
Mori et al.
(2004)
Ziefle & Bay
(2006)
propose three levels of abstractions that allow
designers to focus on the relevant logical
aspects and avoid dealing with platforms and
interaction modalities while preserving
usability.
identify three types of knowledge for
successful interaction with a cell phone: survey
knowledge, route knowledge, landmark
knowledge
Selection of Phones
a)
b)
(a)
c)
(b)
(c)
grouping menus on the
basis of their thematic
similarities (iPhone);
grouping menus
according to categories
in terms of parent-child
taxonomy (Nokia);
functional - a combination
of a) and b)
(Blackberry).
Selection of Participants
Participants
 had a TBI - suffered moderate or severe trauma with
disabling consequences
 able to understand the study
 able to communicate with the researchers
 had some experience with a mobile phone
 receiving rehabilitation at the neuro-rehabilitation
providers (Cavit ABI)
 identified by Cavit ABI as meeting selection criteria.
 Ethical approval from the Northern Y Regional Ethics
Committee in New Zealand
Interviewing process
Procedure




The interviews were recorded and transcribed
separately.
The transcripts were coded and content analysis
conducted, taking into consideration the context and
role of the contributor (Patton, M. Q. 2002).
Initial categories were collated from each source, with
comparisons made within data (QSR nVivo©)
categories were linked into themes
Key findings: unique needs
they [icons]
are fine we
can still see
them …. the
words are still
a little bit small
“when you got to
push a button
you end up pushing
two or three
buttons“…
if there was no
text I would
misinterpret that
one [options] for
settings
“I hate having to push it
down a bit and put effort
into it…I’d rather have
the easy as you can
push it “
there are certain
things that you
go to but
sometimes I
keep forgetting
where it is
“I would be able to
just push the
button …it’s lot
better than touch
screen”
people with
big
fingers...stylus
would be
better
“that’s the very
annoying one….I
end up losing it “
Key findings: themes
Physiological
 Button size
 Button type
 Touch type
 Using stylus
 Text size
Cognitive
 Icon recognition
 Menu depth
Buttons
1. larger buttons/icons than presented with any
of the three mobile phones
2. picture
based
icons
supported
by
unambiguous and reasonably sized text titles
3. one allotted function per icon/button
Features
Conclusion
1. soft touch
2. stylus (for use with virtual keyboard).
3. voice control
Contribution
This research (even with a small sample)
 shows the importance of seeking specific user feedback (people with
TBI have unique needs)
 highlights limitations to current technologies for these users
Future work could
 validate and expand on the design implications found with more
participants and more in-depth inquiry
 explore other ideas such as using voice interaction or users typing
menu entries (a command-language style) in a text-box as an initial
version substituting voice interaction (Thimbleby,1987)




David Nandigam
Judith Symonds
Nicola Kayes
Kathryn McPherson
Mobile Phone User interface Design for Patients
with Traumatic Brain Injury
Acknowledgements





the Health Research Council (NZ) for funding
my advisor Dr Judith Symonds for all the support and guidance
Joanna Fadyl for training me for qualitative interviewing
the clinicians & participants at Cavit ABI for their time and commitment
the Goals-SR Research Group for guiding this research
References



McPherson, K., Kayes, N., & Weatherall, M.. (2009).
Jhangiani, I., & Smith-Jackson, T. (2007).
Patton, M. Q. (2002).