[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
Skip header Section
Evaluating Children's Interactive Products: Principles and Practices for Interaction DesignersMay 2008
Publisher:
  • Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
  • 340 Pine Street, Sixth Floor
  • San Francisco
  • CA
  • United States
ISBN:978-0-08-055825-7
Published:22 May 2008
Pages:
400
Skip Bibliometrics Section
Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025Bibliometrics
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract

Interactive products designed for children--whether toys, games, educational products, or websites--are increasingly embedded in children's lives and school experiences. Making these products safe, effective, and entertaining requires new methodologies for carrying out sound and unbiased evaluations for these users with unique requirements, environments, and ethical considerations. This book directly addresses this need by thoroughly covering the evaluation of all types of interactive technology for children. Based on the authors' workshops, conference courses, and own design experience and research, this highly practical book reads like a handbook, while being thoroughly grounded in the latest research. Throughout, the authors illustrate techniques and principles with numerous mini case studies and highlight practical information in tips and exercises and conclude with three in-depth case studies. Essential reading for usability experts, product developers, and researchers in the field. * Presents an essential background in child development and child psychology, particularly as they relate to technology. * Captures best practices for observing and surveying children, training evaluators, and capturing the child user experience using audio and visual technology. * Examines ethical and legal issues involved in working with children and offers guidelines for effective risk management.

References

  1. ACM. (1992). ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Retrieved January 2008 from http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Acuff, D. S., and Reiher, E. E. (1997). What kids buy and why: The psychology of marketing to kids . New York: The Free Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Agresti, A., and Finlay, B. (1999). Statistical methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alderson, P. (2004). Ethics. In S. Fraser, V. Lewis, S. Ding, M. Kellett, and C. Robinson (Eds.), Doing research with children and young people (pp. 97-112). London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Allen, G. (2005). Research ethics in a culture of risk. In A. Farrell (Ed.), Ethical research with children (pp. 15-26). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Al Mahmud, A., Mubin, O., Octavia, J. R., Shahid, S., Yeo, L. C., Markopoulos, P., and Martens, J. B. (2007). aMAZEd: Designing an affective social game for children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children . Aalborg, Denmark, 53-56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Als, B. S., Jensen, J. J., and Skov, M. B. (2005). Comparison of think-aloud and constructive interaction in usability testing with children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO, 9-16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Alaszewski, A. (2006). Using diaries for social research . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Andersson, G., Höök, K., Mourão, D., Paiva, A., and Costa, M. (2002). Using a Wizard of Oz study to inform the design of SenToy. Proceedings of DIS . London: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Antle, A. (2003). Case study: The design of CBC4Kids' StoryBuilder. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 59-68. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. APA. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct, APA. Retrieved January 2008, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Baauw, E., and Markopoulos, P. (2004). A comparison of think-aloud and post-task interview. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Baltimore, 115-117. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Baauw, E., Bekker, M. M., and Barendregt, W. (2005). A structured expert evaluation method for the evaluation of children's computer games. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , 457-469. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Badler, N. I., and Smoliar, S. W. (1979). Digital representations of human movement. Computing Surveys , 11(1), 19-38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Barendregt, W. (2006). Evaluating fun and usability in computer games with children. PhD Thesis, University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Barendreget, W., Bekker, M. M., and Baauw, E. (2008). Development and evaluation of the problem identification picture cards method. Cognition, Technology and Work (in press). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Barendregt, W., Bekker, M. M., and Speerstra, M. (2003). Empirical evaluation of usability and fun in computer games for children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Zurich, 705-708.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Barendregt, W., Bekker, M. M., Bouwhuis, D. G., and Baauw, E. (2006). Identifying usability and fun problems in a computer game during first use and after some practice. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 64, 830-846. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Baum, L. F. (1900). The wonderful Wizard of Oz. Chicago: George M Hill Co.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Beamish, D., Ali Bhatti, S., and MacKenzie, I. S. (2006). Fifty years later: A neurodynamic explanation of Fitts' law. Journal of the Royal Society Interface , 3, 649-654.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Bekker, M. M., Baauw, E., and Barendregt, W. (2007). A comparison of two analytical evaluation methods for educational computer games for young children. Cognition, Technology and Work (in press). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Bogdan, R. C., and Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Borgers, N., and Hox, J. (2001). Item nonresponse in questionnaire research with children. Journal of Official Statistics , 17 (2), 321-335.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Borgers, N., Hox, J., and Sikkel, D. (2004). Response effects in surveys on children and adolescents: The effect of number of response options, negative wording, and neutral mid-point. Quality and Quantity , 38 (1), 17-33.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Borgers, N., Leeuw, E. D., and Hox, J. (2000). Children as respondents in survey research: Cognitive development and response quality. Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique , 66, 60-75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Boren, M. T., and Ramey, J. (2000). Thinking aloud: Reconciling theory and practice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication , 43, 261-278.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Bowers, V. A., Snyder, H. I. (1990). Concurrent versus retrospective verbal protocol for comparing window usability. Proceedings of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46th Annual Meeting , 1270-1274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Breakwell, G. (1995). Research methods in psychology . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Brederode, B., Markopoulos, P., Gielen, M., Vermeeren, A., and de Ridder, H. (2005). Powerball: The design of a novel mixed-reality game for children with mixed abilities. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Bruckman, A. S., and Bandlow, A. (2003). Human-computer interaction for kids. In J. A. Jacko and A. Sears (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook (pp. 428-440). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., and Melnyk, L. (1997). External and internal sources of variation in the creation of false reports in children. Learning and Individual Differences , 9 (4), 269-316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Buckleitner, W. (1999). The state of children's software evaluation--yesterday, today and in the 21st century. Information Technology in Childhood Education , 1, 211-220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Burmeister, O. K. (2000). Usability testing: Revisiting informed consent procedures for testing Internet sites. Proceedings 2nd Australian Institute of Computer Ethics Conference , Canberra, Australia, 3-9. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Buisine, S., and Martin, J. C. (2005). children's and adults' multimodal interaction with 2D conversational agents. Proceedings of CHI , Portland, OR. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Carroll, J. M. (2002). Human-computer interaction in the new millennium . New York: Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Carroll, J. M. (2004). Beyond fun. Interactions , 11 (5), 38-40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Carter, S., and Mankoff, J. (2005). When participants do the capturing: The role of media in diary studies. Proceedings of CHI , Portland, OR. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Cassell, J. (2002). Genderizing HCI. In J. Jacko and A. Sears (Eds.), The handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 402-411). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Christensen, P., and James, A. (Eds.) (1999). Research with children: Perspectives and practices . London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Clarke, A. (2005). Guidelines for the design and deployment of ICT products and services used by children . Sophia Antipolis, France: ETSI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Cockton, G., Lavery, D., and Woolrych, A. (2002). Inspection-based evaluations. In J. A. Jacko and A. Sears (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook (pp. 1118-1138). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Cockton, G., and Woolrych, A. (2001). Understanding inspection methods: Lessons from an assessment of heuristic evaluation. In B. Blandford, J. Vanderdonckt, and P. Gray (Eds.), People and computers XV (pp. 171-192). London: Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Cockton, G., and Woolrych, A. (2002). Sale must end: Should discount methods be cleared off HCI's shelves? Interactions , September-October, 13-18. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Cockton, G., Woolrych, A., and Hindmarch, M. (2004). Reconditioned merchandise: Extended structured report formats in usability inspection. Proceedings of CHI, Extended Abstract , 1433-1436. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Coolican, H. (2004). Research methods and statistics in psychology (4th ed.). Abingdon: Hodder and Stoughton.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates are running the asylum . New York: Macmillan. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Cooper, A. (2003). About face 2.0: The essentials of interaction design . Indianapolis: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Courage, C., and Baxter, K. (2005). Understanding your users--a practical guide to user requirements, methods, tools, and techniques . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Crane, H. D., and Steele, C. M. (1985). Generation-V Dual-Purkinje-Image Eyetracker. Applied Optics , 24, 527-537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Dahlback, N., Jonsson, A., and Ahrenberg, L. (1993). Wizard of Oz studies--why and how. Knowledge-Based Systems , 6(4), 258-266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Damon, W., and Phelps, E. (1989). Strategic users of peer learning in children's education. In T. Berndt and G. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 135-157). New York: John Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Danby, S., and Farrell, A. (2005). Opening the research conversation. In A. Farrell (Ed.), Ethical research with children (pp. 49-67). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly , 13(3), 319-340. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Denzin, N. K., and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds). (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Department for Education and Skills. (2005). Harnessing technology . Nottingham, DfES: 71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Dindler, C., Eriksson, E., Sejer, O., Lykke-Oleson, A., and Ludvigsen, M. (2005). Mission from Mars--A method for exploring user requirements for children in narrative space. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., and Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (3rd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Donker, A., and Markopoulos, P. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of usability evaluation methods for children. In N. Avouris and N. Fakotakis (Eds.), Advances in human-computer interaction (pp. 409-410). Patras, Greece: Typorama Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Donker, A., and Markopoulos, P. (2002). A comparison of think-aloud, questionnaires and interviews for testing usability with children. People and computers XVI-- memorable yet invisible. Proceedings of HCI , 305-316.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Donker, A., and Reitsma, P. (2004). Usability testing with young children. In A. Druin, J. P. Hourcade, and S. Kollet (Eds.), Interaction design and children (pp. 43-48). Baltimore: ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Draper, S. W. (1999). Analysing fun as a candidate software requirement. Personal Technology , 3, 117-122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Druin, A. (Ed.) (1999). The design of children's technology . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and Information Technology , 21(1), 1-25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye-tracking methodology: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). London: Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Dumas, J., and Redish, J. (1993). A practical guide to usability testing . Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Ericsson, K. A., and Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review , 87(3), 215-251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. Ericsson, K. A., and Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis. Verbal reports as data (revised ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Farrell, A. (Ed.) (2005a). Ethical research with children . Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Farrell, A. (2005b). Ethics and research with children. In A. Farrell (Ed.), Ethical research with children (pp. 1-4). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Forlizzi, J., and Battarbee, K. (2004). Understanding experience in interactive systems. Proceedings of Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques , 261-268. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Fransella, F., and Bannister, D. (1977). Amanual for repertory grid technique . London: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Fraser, N., and Gilbert, N. S. (1991). Simulating speech systems. C omputer Speech and Language , 5, 81-99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Fraser, S., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M., and Robinson, C. (Eds.) (2004). Doing research with children and young people . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Gaustad, J. (1993). Peer and cross-age tutoring. ERIC Digest , 79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Gilutz, S., and Nielsen, J. (2002). Usability of websites for children: 70 design guidelines . Freemont, CA: Nielsen Norman Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Gould, J. D., Conti, J., and Hovanyecz, T. (1983). Composing letters with a simulated listening typewriter. Communications of the ACM , 26 (4), 295-308. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. Greig, A., and Taylor, A. (1999). Doing research with children . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Hall, L., Woods, S., Wolke, D., Dautenhahn, K., and Sobreperez, P. (2004). Using storyboards to guide virtual world design, Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Baltimore. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Hämäläinen, P., and Höysniemi, J. (2002). A computer vision and hearing based user interface for a computer game for children. Proceedings of 7th ERCIM Workshop "User Interfaces for All ," Paris, 23-25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Hammerton, L., and Luckin, R. (2001). How to help? Investigating children's opinions on help: To inform the design of Metacognitive Software Scaffolding. AIED 2001 , San Antonio.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Hanna, E., Risden, K., Czerwinski, M., and Alexander, K. J. (1999). The role of usability research in designing children's computer products. In A. Druin (Ed.), The design of children's technology (pp. 4-26). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Hanna, L., Risden, K., and Alexander, K. (1997). Guidelines for usability testing with children. Interactions , 4 (5), 9-14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. Hartson, H., Rex, A., Terence, S., and Williges, R. C. (2003). Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 15 (1), 145-181.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  84. Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research . Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. Hendersson, V., Lee, S.-W., Brashear, H., Hamilton, H., Starner, T., and Hamilton, S. (2005). Development of an American sign language game for deaf children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. Hertzum, M., and Jacobsen, N. E. (2001). The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 13(4), 421-443.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. Hill, M. (2005). Ethical considerations in researching children's experiences. In S. Greene and D. Hogan (Eds.), Researching children's experience (pp. 61-86). London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  88. Houde, S., and Hill, C. (1997). What do prototypes prototype? In M. G. Helander, T. K. Landauer, and P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed.) (pp. 367-381). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  89. Höysniemi, J., and Read, J. C. (2005). Wizard of Oz with children--ethical dilemmas and experiences from the field. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Höysniemi, J., Hämäläinen, P., and Turkki, L. (2003). Using peer tutoring in evaluating the usability of a physically interactive computer game with children. Interacting with Computers , 15(2), 205-225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  91. Höysniemi, J., Hämäläinen, P., and Turkki, L. (2002). Using peer tutoring in evaluating the usability of a physically interactive computer game with children. Proceedings of International Workshop on Interaction Design and Children , Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 144-152.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  92. Höysniemi, J., Hämäläinen, P., and Turkki, L. (2004). Wizard of Oz prototyping of computer vision based action games for children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Baltimore, 27-34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  93. Höysniemi, J., and Hämäläinen, P. (2004). Describing children's intuitive movements in a perceptive adventure game. Proceedings of Workshop on Multimodal Corpora: Models of human behaviour for the specification and evaluation of multimodal input and output interface , Lisbon, 21-24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. Höysniemi, J., Hämäläinen, P., Turkki, L., and Rouvi, T. (2005). children's intuitive gestures in vision based action games. Communications of the ACM , 48 (1), 44-50. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  95. Ibrahim, Z., Dimitrova, V., and Boyle, R. D. (2004). Capturing human teachers' strategies for supporting schema-based cognitive tasks to inform the design of an intelligent pedagogical agent. Proceedings of Intelligent Tutoring Systems .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. Ingram, D. E. (1984). Report on the formal trialling of the Australian second language proficiency ratings (ASLPR) . Studies in Adult Migrant Education, Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. ISO. (1998). ISO 9241-11, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)--Part 11: Guidance on usability.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Javal, E. (1879). Essai sur la Physiologie de la Lecture. Annales d'Oculistique , 81, 61-73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Kahn, M. J., and Prail, A. (1994). Formal usability inpections. In J. N ielsen and R. L. Mack (Eds.), Usability inspection methods (pp. 141-171). New York: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  100. Kail, R. V. (2002). Children . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Kano, A., Read, J. C., Dix, A., and MacKenzie, I. S. (2007). ExpECT: An expanded error categorisation method for text input. Proceedings of BCS HCI , Lancaster, UK. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  102. Keats, D. M. (2000). Cross-cultural studies in child development in Asian contexts. Cross-Cultural Research , 34(4), 339-350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  103. Kelley, J. F. (1984). An iterative design methodology for user friendly natural language office information applications. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems , 2(1), 26-41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  104. Kemp, J. A. M., and van Gelderen, T. (1996). Co-discovery exploration: An informal method for iterative design of consumer products. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, and I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 139-146). London: Taylor and Francis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  105. Kipp, M. (2001). Anvil--A generic annotation tool for multimodal dialogue. Proceedings of 7th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (Eurospeech) , Aalborg, Denmark, 1367-1370.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  106. Korhonen, H., and Koivisto, E. M. I. (2006). Playability heuristics for mobile games. Proceedings of Mobile HCI , 9-14. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  107. Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 5, 213-236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  108. Kuniavsky, M. (2003). Observing the user experience . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  109. Kuper, J. (1997). International Law Concerning Child Civilians in Armed Conflict. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  110. Laban, R. (1975). Laban's principles of dance and movement notation (2nd ed.). London: Macdonald and Evans.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  111. Lewis, V., Kellett, M., Robinson, C., Fraser, S., and Ding, S. (Eds.). (2004). The reality of research with children and young people . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  112. Loke, L., Larssen, A. T., and Robertson, T. (2005). Laban notation for design of movement based interaction. Proceedings of 2nd Australaian Conference on Interactive Entertainment , 113-120. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  113. Luckin, R. (2001). Designing children's software to ensure productive interactivity through collaboration in the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Information Technology in Childhood Annual , 13, 57-85. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  114. MacFarlane, S., and Pasiali, A. (2005). Adapting the heuristic evaluation method for use with children. Proceedings of Interact Workshop on Child-Computer Interaction: Methodological Research , Rome, 28-31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  115. MacFarlane, S., Sim, G., and Horton, M. (2005). Assessing usability and fun in educational software. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children . Boulder, CO, 103-109. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  116. Mackay, W. E. (1995). Ethics, lies, and videotape. Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , Denver, 138-145. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  117. MacKenzie, I. S., and Soukoreff, R. W. (2002). Text entry for mobile computing: Models and methods, theory and practice. Human-Computer Interaction , 17 (2), 147-198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  118. Malone, T. W. (1980). What makes things fun to learn? A study of intrinsically motivating computer games. PhD Thesis, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  119. Malone, T. W., and Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivation for learning. In R. E. Snow and M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction. Cognitive and affective process analysis (vol. 3). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  120. Markopoulos, P., Barendregt, W., Brus, M., and Plakman, I. (2005). The parent evaluator method. Proceedings of Interact Workshop on Child-Computer Interaction: Methodological Research , Rome.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  121. Martin, D. W. (2005). Doing psychology experiments (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  122. Mayhew, D. (1999). The usability engineering lifecycle . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  123. Measelle, J. R.., Ablow, J. C., Cowan, P. A., and Cowan, C. P. (1998). Assessing young children's views of their academic, social, and emotional lives: An evaluation of the self-perception scales of the Berkeley puppet interview. Child Development , 69, 1556-1576.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  124. Metaxas, G., Metin, B., Schneider, J., Shapiro, G., Zhou, W., and Markopoulos, P. (2005). SCORPIODROME: An Exploration in Mixed Reality Social Gaming for Children. Proceedings of ACE , Valencia, Spain, 229-232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  125. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook . London: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  126. Molich, R., Laurel, B., Snyder, C., Quesenbery, W., and Wilson, C. (2001). Panel-- Ethics in HCI. Proceedings of CHI , Seattle, 217-218. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  127. Montemayor, J., Druin, A., Farber, A., Sims, S., Churaman, W., and D'Amour, A. (2002). Physical programming: Designing tools for children to create physical interactive environments. Proceedings of CHI . Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  128. Mota, S., Picard, R. W. (2003). Automated posture analysis for detecting learner's interest level. Workshop on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , Madison, WI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  129. Murray, R. (2004). Writing for academic journals . Buckingham: Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  130. Newell, A., and Simon, H. A. (1993). Human problem solving . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  131. Nielsen, J. (2007). Eyetracking Research . Retrieved January 2008 from http://www.useit. com/eyetracking/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  132. Nielsen, J. (1994a). Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. Proceedings of CHI , 153-158. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  133. Nielsen, J. (1994b). Heuristic evaluation. In J. Nielsen and R. L. M ack (Eds.), Usability inspection method (pp. 25-62). New York: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  134. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering . Boston: Academic Press. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  135. Nielsen, J., and Mack, R. L. (Eds.) (1994). Usability inspection methods . New York: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  136. Nielsen, J., and Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. Proceedings of CHI , Seattle. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  137. Nielsen, J., and Pernice, K. (2007). Eyetracking Web usability . Indianapolis: New Riders. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  138. Norman, D. (2002). The design of everyday things . New York: Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  139. Ohnemus, K. R. & Biers, D. W. (1993). Retrospective versus concurrent thinking-out-loud in usability testing. Proceedings of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting , Santa Monica, 1127-1131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  140. O'Malley, C. E., Draper, S. W., and Riley, M. S. (1984). Constructive interaction: A method for studying human-computer interaction. Proceedings of IFIP Interact , 269-274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  141. Palen, L., and Salzman, M. (2002). Voice-mail diary studies for naturalistic data capture under mobile conditions. Proceedings of CSCW , 87-95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  142. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms, children, computers and powerful ideas . New York: Basic Books. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  143. Peterson, C., and Bell, M. (1996). children's memory for traumatic injury. Child Development , 67 (6), 3045-3070.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  144. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child . New York: Orion Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  145. Plowman, L. (2003). A benign addition? Research on ICT and pre-school children. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 19, 149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  146. Poole, A., and Ball, L. J. (2006). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research. In C. Ghaoui (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction . London: Ideas Group Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  147. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., and Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction . New York: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  148. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon , 9(5), 1-2. Available from www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives, %20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20 Part1.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  149. Price, S., Rogers, S., Scaife, M., Stanton, D., and Neale, H. (2003). Using "tangibles" to promote novel forms of playful learning. Interacting with Computers , 15(2), 169-185.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  150. Pruitt, J., and Adlin, T. (2005). The persona lifecycle: Keeping users in mind throughout product design . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  151. Read, J. C. (2004). Designing multimedia applications for children. Comp@uclan 3 .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  152. Read, J. C. (2005). The ABC of CCI. Interfaces , 62, 8-9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  153. Read, J. C., Kelly, S. R., and Birkett, S. (2006). How satisfying is gaze tracking for children? Paper presented at the CHI Workshop--Getting a Measure of Satisfaction from Eyetracking in Practice , Montreal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  154. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Casey, C. (2001). Measuring the usability of text input methods for children. Proceedings of Conference on HCI , Lille, France.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  155. Read, J. C., Gregory, P., MacFarlane, S. J., McManus, B., Gray, P., and Patel, R. (2002). An investigation of participatory design with children--informant, balanced and facilitated design. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 53-64). Eindhoven: Maastricht Shaker Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  156. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Casey, C. (2002). Endurability, engagement and expectations: Measuring children's fun. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 189-198). Eindhoven: Shaker Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  157. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Casey, C. (2003). What's going on? Discovering what children understand about handwriting recognition interfaces. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 135-140. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  158. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Gregory, A. G. (2004). Requirements for the design of a handwriting recognition based writing interface for children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Baltimore, 81-87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  159. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Horton, M. (2004). The usability of handwriting recognition for writing in the primary classroom. Proceedings of Conference on HCI , Leeds, UK, 135-150.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  160. Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J., and Casey, C. (2003). Good enough for what? Acceptance of handwriting recognition errors by child users. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 155. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  161. Read, J. C., Mazzone, E., and Höysniemi, J. (2005). Wizard of Oz evaluations with children-- deception and discovery. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Boulder, CO.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  162. Renshaw, T., and Dickenson, S. (2007). The integration of images and text by children learning how to read: An eye tracking study (submitted to Early Childhood Research Quarterly ).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  163. Richardson, D. C., and Spivey, M. J. (2004). Eye tracking: Characteristics and methods. In G. E. Wnek and G. L. Bowlin (Eds.), E ncyclopedia of biomaterials and biomedical engineering . New York: Marcel Dekker.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  164. Risden, K., Hanna, E., and Kanerva, A. (1997). Dimensions of intrinsic motivation in children's favorite computer activities. Poster presented at the Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development , Washington, DC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  165. Robertson, J., and Wiemer-Hastings, P. (2002). Feedback on children's stories via multiple interface agents. Proceedings of 6th Annual Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems , Biarritz, San Sebastian. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  166. Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., and Dubowski, J. (2004). Investigating autistic children's attitudes towards strangers with the theatrical robot--a new experimental paradigm in human-robot interaction studies. Prooceedings of 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication . Karashiki, Japan.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  167. Rode, J. A., Stringer, M., Toye, E. F., Simpson, A., and Blackwell, A. F. (2003). Curriculum-Focused design. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 119-126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  168. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  169. Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of usability testing: How to plan, design and conduct effective tests . New York: John Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  170. Santamaria, M. (2003). Web navigation recorder--eye tracking software application demo. Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 166. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  171. Scaife, M., and Rogers, Y. (1999). Kids as informants: Telling us what we didn't know, or confirming what we knew already. In A. Druin (Ed.), The design of children's technology . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  172. Scullin, M. H., and Ceci, S. J. (2001). A suggestibility scale for children. Personality and Individual Differences , 30, 843-856.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  173. Sears, A. (1997). Heuristic walkthrough: Finding the problems without the noise. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 9 (3), 213-234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  174. Seely, J. (2002). Writing reports . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  175. Seely, J. (2005). Oxford guide to effective writing and speaking (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  176. Shields, B. J., Palermo, T. M., Powers, J. D., Grewe, S. D., and Smith, G. A. (2003). Predictors of a child's ability to use a visual analogue scale. Child: Care, Health and Development , 29 (4), 281-290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  177. Shneiderman, B., and Plaisant, C. (2004). Designing the user interface (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  178. Siegel, S., and Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences . New York: McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  179. Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., and Blades, M. (2003). Understanding children's development (4th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  180. Stone, D., Jarrett, C., Woodroffe, M., and Minocha, S. (2005). User interface design and evaluation . San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  181. Strunk, W. I., and White, E. B. (1999). The elements of style (4th ed.). New York: Longman.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  182. Thomas, J. C. (1976). A method for studying natural language dialog IBM, Thomas J. Watson Research Center.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  183. Tobey, A., and Goodman, G. (1992). children's eyewitness memory: Effects of participation and forensic context. Child Abuse and Neglect , 16, 807-821.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  184. Tufte, E. R. (2006). Beautiful evidence . Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  185. Vaillancourt, P. M. (1973). Stability of children's survey responses. Public Opinion Quarterly , 37, 373-387.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  186. van Kesteren, I. E., Bekker, M. M., Vermeeren, A. P., and Lloyd, P. A. (2003). Assessing usability evaluation methods on their effectiveness to elicit verbal comments from children subjects. Proceeding of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Preston, UK, 41-49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  187. Verhaegh, J., Soute, I., Kessels, A., and Markopoulos, P. (2006). On the design of Camelot, an outdoor game for children. Proceedings of Conference on Interaction Design and Children , Tampere, Finland, 9-16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  188. Vermeeren, A. P. O. S., van Kesteren, I. E. H., and Bekker, M. M. (2003). Managing the evaluator effect in user testing. Proceedings of IFIP 9th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction--INTERACT , Zürich, 647-654.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  189. Verschoor, Y. (2007). Using a social robot as facilitator in usability-tests with children. Master thesis. University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  190. Ward, T. (2003). I watched in dumb horror. The Guardian , May 20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  191. Wartella, E. A., Lee, J. H., and Caplovitz, A. G. (2002). Children and interactive media : Research compendium update. Markle Foundation. Retrieved January 2008 from http://www.markle.org/downloadable_assets/cimcomp_update.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  192. Woodhead, M., and Faulkner, D. (2000). Subjects, objects or participants? Dilemmas of psychological research with children. In P. Christensen and A. James (Eds.), Research with children (pp. 9-35). London: Falmer Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  193. Woodward, E. H., and Gridina, N. (2000). Media in the home 2000: The fifth annual survey of parents and children . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  194. Zinsser, W. (2006). On writing well (30th anniversary ed.). New York: HarperCollins.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Cited By

  1. ACM
    Vang P and Lauff C Reflections on Data Collection during Toy Prototype Development in a Design Studio Course Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference, (940-944)
  2. ACM
    Södergren A Ensuring Inclusivity and Well-being of Children Call for Accuracy in Ethical (Design) Practices: Making the Interpersonal Aspects of Data Collection Explicit and Value-centred by Scaffolding the Quality Criterion of 'Sincerity' in Human-involved Research Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference, (856-868)
  3. Fitton D, Cheverst K and Read J Yayy! You Have a New Notification: Co-designing Multi-device Locative Media Experiences with Young People Human-Computer Interaction. Design and User Experience, (217-233)
  4. ACM
    Mispa K, Mansor E and Kamaruddin A Evaluating Children's User Experience (UX) Towards Mobile Application Proceedings of the 5th International ACM In-Cooperation HCI and UX Conference, (46-54)
  5. ACM
    Perry E, Baraudon C and Fleck S Designing HCI for education Proceedings of the 30th Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine, (186-194)
  6. Nizam D and Law E In the eyes of young children Proceedings of the 32nd International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference, (1-13)
  7. ACM
    Hershman A, Nazare J, Qi J, Saveski M, Roy D and Resnick M Light it up Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (365-372)
  8. ACM
    Fleck S, Baraudon C, Frey J, Lainé T and Hachet M "Teegi's so cute!" Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (143-156)
  9. ACM
    Schafer G, Fullerton S, Walker I, Vijaykumar A and Green K Words Become Worlds Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, (511-522)
  10. ACM
    Sargeant B and Mueller F How Far Is Up? Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1-12)
  11. ACM
    Mueller F, Byrne R, Andres J and Patibanda R Experiencing the Body as Play Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1-13)
  12. ACM
    Read J Research Methods for Child Computer Interaction Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1-4)
  13. Cano S, Alghazzawi D, Arteaga J, Fardoun H, Collazos C and Amador V (2018). Applying the information search process model to analyze aspects in the design of serious games for children with hearing impairment, Universal Access in the Information Society, 17:1, (83-95), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018.
  14. ACM
    de Wit J, Schodde T, Willemsen B, Bergmann K, de Haas M, Kopp S, Krahmer E and Vogt P The Effect of a Robot's Gestures and Adaptive Tutoring on Children's Acquisition of Second Language Vocabularies Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, (50-58)
  15. ACM
    Fleck S, Baraudon C, Frey J, Lainé T and Hachet M Teegi, he's so cute Proceedings of the 29th Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine, (1-12)
  16. Gennari R, Melonio A, Raccanello D, Brondino M, Dodero G, Pasini M and Torello S (2017). Children's emotions and quality of products in participatory game design, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 101:C, (45-61), Online publication date: 1-May-2017.
  17. ACM
    Cano S, Collazos C, Fardaun H and Alghazzawi D Design of a set serious mini-games as support in cognitive rehabilitation for children with auditory impairment Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on ICTs for improving Patients Rehabilitation Research Techniques, (40-44)
  18. ACM
    Rosa J and Matos E Semio-Participatory Framework for Interaction Design of Educational Software Proceedings of the 15th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1-10)
  19. Felicia P and Jabbar A (2016). Towards a Conceptual Framework of GBL Design for Engagement and Learning of Curriculum-based Content, International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 6:4, (87-108), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2016.
  20. ACM
    Law E, Watkins D, Barwick J and Kirk E An Experiential Approach to the Design and Evaluation of a Gamified Research Tool for Law in Children's Lives Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (322-333)
  21. ACM
    Hall L, Hume C and Tazzyman S Five Degrees of Happiness Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (311-321)
  22. ACM
    Vonach E, Ternek M, Gerstweiler G and Kaufmann H Design of a Health Monitoring Toy for Children Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (58-67)
  23. Stålberg A, Sandberg A, Söderbäck M and Larsson T (2016). The child's perspective as a guiding principle, Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 61:C, (149-158), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2016.
  24. ACM
    Read J and Gilutz S Research Methods for Child Computer Interaction Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (927-930)
  25. ACM
    Cano S, Peñeñory V, Collazos C, Fardoun H and Alghazzawi D Training with Phonak Proceedings of the 3rd 2015 Workshop on ICTs for improving Patients Rehabilitation Research Techniques, (22-25)
  26. Chammas A, Quaresma M and Mont'Alvão C Children's Mental Model as a Tool to Provide Innovation in Digital Products Proceedings, Part II, of the 4th International Conference on Design, User Experience, and Usability: Users and Interactions - Volume 9187, (23-33)
  27. ACM
    Read J and Gilutz S Research Methods for Child Computer Interaction Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2469-2470)
  28. ACM
    Blair K, Pfaffman J, Cutumisu M, Hallinen N and Schwartz D Testing the Effectiveness of iPad Math Game Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (727-734)
  29. ACM
    Fisher K, Bishop A, Magassa L and Fawcett P Action! Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Interaction design and children, (345-348)
  30. ACM
    Eriksson E and Torgersson O Towards a constructively aligned approach to teaching interaction design & children Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Interaction design and children, (333-336)
  31. ACM
    Colombo L and Landoni M A diary study of children's user experience with EBooks using flow theory as framework Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Interaction design and children, (135-144)
  32. Ros R, Baroni I and Demiris Y (2014). Adaptive human-robot interaction in sensorimotor task instruction, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 62:6, (707-720), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2014.
  33. ACM
    Korte J, Potter L and Nielsen S Great expectations Proceedings of the 52nd ACM conference on Computers and people research, (105-111)
  34. ACM
    Read J and Markopoulos P Evaluating children's interactive products CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1043-1044)
  35. ACM
    Yarosh S, Markopoulos P and Abowd G Towards a questionnaire for measuring affective benefits and costs of communication technologies Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, (84-96)
  36. ACM
    Baloian N, Pino J and Vargas R Tablet gestures as a motivating factor for learning Proceedings of the 2013 Chilean Conference on Human - Computer Interaction, (98-103)
  37. ACM
    Robertson J and Balaam M Designing for the needs of child patients in hospital settings Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (625-627)
  38. ACM
    Mana N, Mich O, De Angeli A and Druin A Interactive e-books for children Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (593-595)
  39. ACM
    Lyra O, Karapanos E, Gouveia R, Nisi V and Nunes N Engaging children in longitudinal behavioral studies through playful technologies Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (396-399)
  40. ACM
    Soute I, Lagerström S and Markopoulos P Rapid prototyping of outdoor games for children in an iterative design process Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (74-83)
  41. ACM
    Szostek A, Kwiatkowska J and Górnicka O The needs of early school children and their parents with respect to the design of mobile service offers CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2345-2346)
  42. ACM
    Ognjanovic S and Ralls J Don't talk to strangers! CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2337-2340)
  43. ACM
    Fitton D, Read J and Horton M The challenge of working with teens as participants in interaction design CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (205-210)
  44. ACM
    Hengeveld B, Hummels C, van Balkom H, Voort R and de Moor J Wrapping up LinguaBytes, for now Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, (237-244)
  45. ACM
    Katterfeldt E, Zeising A and Schelhowe H Designing digital media for teen-aged apprentices Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (196-199)
  46. ACM
    Colombo L and Landoni M Towards an engaging e-reading experience Proceedings of the 4th ACM workshop on Online books, complementary social media and crowdsourcing, (61-66)
  47. ACM
    Mich O E-drawings as an evaluation method with deaf children The proceedings of the 13th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility, (239-240)
  48. ACM
    Girard S and Johnson H Designing affective animations with children as design partners using role-playing Proceedings of the 23rd Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine, (1-8)
  49. Colombo L Designing highly engaging ebook experiences for kids Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Theory and practice of digital libraries: research and advanced technology for digital libraries, (531-534)
  50. Mazzone E, Read J and Beale R Towards a framework of co-design sessions with children Proceedings of the 13th IFIP TC 13 international conference on Human-computer interaction - Volume Part IV, (632-635)
  51. McKnight L and Read J PLU-E Proceedings of the 25th BCS Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, (126-131)
  52. ACM
    Birkett S, Galpin A, Cassidy S, Marrow L and Norgate S How revealing are eye-movements for understanding web engagement in young children CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2251-2256)
  53. ACM
    Humphries L and McDonald S Emotion faces CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (1453-1458)
  54. ACM
    Coyle D, McGlade N, Doherty G and O'Reilly G Exploratory evaluations of a computer game supporting cognitive behavioural therapy for adolescents Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (2937-2946)
  55. ACM
    Kano A, Horton M and Read J Thumbs-up scale and frequency of use scale for use in self reporting of children's computer experience Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries, (699-702)
  56. ACM
    Denise F, Cléder C, Girard S and Audras I Introduction d'un compagnon dans un logiciel éducatif en classe Proceedings of the Ergonomie et Informatique Avancee Conference, (29-36)
  57. ACM
    op't Hof L, de Pee J, Sturm J, Bekker T and Verbeek J Prolonged play with the ColorFlares Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fun and Games, (99-106)
  58. ACM
    deDiego-Cottinelli A and Barros B TRAZO Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (278-281)
  59. ACM
    Yarosh S and Markopoulos P Design of an instrument for the evaluation of communication technologies with children Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (266-269)
  60. ACM
    McKnight L and Fitton D Touch-screen technology for children Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (238-241)
  61. ACM
    Zaman B and Abeele V Laddering with young children in User eXperience evaluations Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (156-165)
  62. ACM
    Marco J, Baldassarri S and Cerezo E Bridging the gap between children and tabletop designers Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (98-107)
  63. ACM
    Fransen S and Markopoulos P Let robots do the talking Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, (59-68)
  64. ACM
    Marco J, Baldassarri S, Cerezo E, Xu D and Read J (2010). LIFELONG INTERACTIONSLet the experts talk, Interactions, 17:1, (58-61), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2010.
  65. ACM
    Zaman B, Vanden Abeele V, Markopoulos P and Marshall P Tangibles for children, CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (4729-4732)
  66. ACM
    Bakker S, Markopoulos P and de Kort Y OPOS Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: building bridges, (33-42)
Contributors
  • Eindhoven University of Technology
  • University of Central Lancashire
  • University of Central Lancashire
  • Tampere University
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Recommendations