Keywords

1 Introduction

Information and communication technologies have never pervaded society more and thus have become an integral part of everyday life. However, the acceptance and usage of technology of older adults still lacks behind, which leads to social exclusion, making it imperative to consider older adults in the development process to achieve the best possible accessibility and usability [3, 5, 10]. To ensure that products meet the right requirements, it is essential to actively integrate the older age group as co-authors to technology [8, 22].

The Historytelling (HT) project remains heavily on the integration of older adults in the whole human centered design process and engages them from early on in the project to cooperatively create technology [20]. It aims to compensate age-related deficits and addresses strengths such as life-experience. Thus, HT is a social networking site, offering older adults the possibility to document and share personal life stories and categorize them regarding their historical, temporal and local context. HT has influence on a personal, family and group as well as on a societal level. On the personal level it provides, for instance, the possibility for biographical work, cognitive training, life long learning and confrontation with the own past. On the family and group level it fosters the connection between family and friends, creates new bonds between people and promotes inter-generational knowledge transfer. On a societal level, HT offers a tool for multi-perspective history and active participation in the society.

There are always two aspects relevant in the HT development process: In addition to content-related aspects, such as the design of stimulus material, we are invested in participatory methodological aspects. Thus, this paper presents two workshops which dealt with evaluation of stimulus material and evaluation of prototypes. The workshops used guidelines regarding recruiting, procedure and atmosphere and methods acting as a practical example of this approach [16].

One important aspect for the success of HT is the question of how to engage older adults to tell their personal life stories. Remembering and sharing autobiographic life stories is different than telling fictional stories and the “autobiographic memory” is essential to access these information. These information are stored in three layers of specificity [4]. These are called the layer of life periods, the layer of general events and the layer of event specific knowledge [12]. An important role in this regards are stimulus materials. If the person has a personal connection to a stimulus material, it can be used as a trigger to provoke mental images. Stimulus material can be of various forms, such as photos, pieces of music or objects [2, 9]. Research on stimulus material focuses mostly on the health sector or fictional storytelling, but lacks of research in regard of autobiographical stories [13, 14, 17, 18]. First findings in triggering memories for HT were already published. There, it could be shown that there has to be a strong emphasize on stimulus material and first design indications were found [19]. Further insights are necessary to provide better guidelines for presenting stimulus material and media usage.

2 Method

Two workshops were conducted to get insights regarding stimulus material and to evaluate a prototype based on the learnings in [19]. Particular attention was paid to ensure compliance with the guidelines published by [16] regarding the active involvement of older adults in the human centered design process. See Table 1 for an overview of the guidelines. The stimulus material was tested regarding the appeal, inspirational power and emotionality. Different types of stimulus material were provided: images, unfamiliar stories, questions, dates and audio. Additionally, a web based prototype was tested, which included the tested stimulus material, based on the HT style guide [21].

Table 1. Guidelines for active participation of older adults. The table is based on [16]. A more detailed version can be found there.
Full size table

2.1 Procedure

Recruiting and communication with participants was done indirectly via the group leaders of the “Deutscher Frauenring e.V.” and the German Association of RuralWomen on a telephone interview, in which the procedure was also discussed in advance (G1). The “Deutscher Frauenring” is an independent, nonpartisan and interdenominational nation wide women’s association and a member organisation of international women’s associations [6]. The German Association of RuralWomen is the largest women’s association in Germany and represents the interests of all women and their families in rural areas [7].

The workshops were divided into five parts:

  • Presentation of the topic and introduction of the participants

  • Filling in questionnaires

  • Open question and answer session

  • Stimulus material evaluation

  • Prototype evaluation

  • Discussion

There was planned time between each section to leave room for further questions and social interaction between the participants as well as between participants and workshop facilitators (G3 & G4).

First, a round of introductions was held with cards from a game called “Dixit” which help with creative thinking and idea generation [11]. Participants were encouraged to use images on these cards to introduce the other participants to an event in their past (G3). See Fig. 1 for exemplary cards.

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Picture of exemplary Dixit cards used to stimulate participants’ creative thinking.

Full size image

Second, questionnaires were provided regarding demographic data and affinity for technology interaction (ATI, [1]). After that, an open question and answer session was held. The topics were:

  • In what situations do you tell stories?

  • Who are you telling stories to?

  • What motivates you?

  • What stops you from telling certain stories?

While the methods mentioned above were carried out in the groups, the following methods were conducted individually.

For designing the stimulus material, various materials were prior printed out and glued on a large wrapping paper (G7). The topics of the stimulus materials were childhood and family (personal stimulus material), GDR and the attacks on 9/11 (historical stimulus material) as well as holidays and wedding (general stimulus material) [15]. The offered media were images, unfamiliar stories of the topic, questions, dates and audio.

Every participant got his or her own wrapping paper of material to avoid group effects and the arrangement of themes was randomized. The participants had the task to label the stimulus material based on different categories with sticky dots:

  • Is it appealing? (red)

  • Can I come up with a story about that? (blue)

  • Is this material emotionally moving? (green)

Each participants individually chose three items which were appealing (pink), he could tell a story about (purple) and that he found emotionally moving (green).

The aim of the prototype evaluation was to evaluate initial concepts and identify first usability problems. In particular, information regarding navigation, use of stimulus material and saving stimulus collections was gathered. The prototype was not fully functional, only some areas were clickable. Thus, the participants had to carry out a task and no deeper exploration was possible. Comments and interactions were recorded through the think aloud method, note taking and screen capturing. See Fig. 2 for a screenshot of the evaluated prototype.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Web based high fidelity prototype used in the evaluation with filter options at the top, personal collection at the bottom and public stimulus material in between.

Full size image

Lastly, the results of all participants regarding the stimulus material evaluation were compiled on another wrapping paper and were open for discussion. Answers were recorded in writing by the workshop facilitators.

3 Results

The first workshop lasted 3 h and was carried out in rooms of the university. The second workshop lasted 8 h and was carried out at the home of the group leader of the “Landfrauen”. The results concern especially the preferred topics of the presented stimulus material and the evaluation of the media. Also, the results regarding the prototype evaluation can help in the further development and refinement of the prototype.

3.1 Participants

At the first workshop 5 older adults (2 male, 3 female) aged from 66 to 77 (M = 72.4, SD = 4.2) from the social environment of “Deutscher Frauenring” took part. At the second workshop 9 older adults (1 male, 8 female) aged from 51 to 78 (M = 67.4, SD = 8.7) from the German Association of RuralWomen were participating. The first group scored 3.9 (SD = 0.4, N = 4) on the Affinity for Technology Interaction on a scale from 1 to 6 (ATI, [1]). The questionnaire of one person could not be evaluated because one value was missing. The second group scored 3.5 (SD = 0.8).

3.2 Question and Answer Session

The open question and answer session resulted in various contributions that are summarized by the posed question in the following.

Situation to Share Stories. The frequency in which participants shared stories were very diverse, ranging from “hardly ever” to “non-stop”. Obstacles to telling stories may be the fear to tell anything not interesting. Most participants answered that storytelling depends on the context they are in and that stories often emerge from conversations with friends and family in more intimate situations or situations that remind of the past.

Persons to Share Stories with. Like the situations to share stories, also the persons to share stories with were diverse, but children and grandchildren were mentioned most frequently. Also, colleagues, friends and relatives of the same age were mentioned. Two persons mentioned that not the person is the most relevant aspect but the situation they are in.

Motivation to Share Stories. Three topics regarding the motivation to share stories emerged. The participants stated that the exchange, especially about mutual travel and events on which everyone in a discussion can participate in are a key motivation to share stories.

Second, the participants acknowledge the rise in self-esteem, when they can pass on knowledge, insights and old stories. Thus, they can make contributions on particular topics and can also learn from other experiences.

Situation and context is, again, key for sharing stories. Stories often develop through a conversation and questions can push a story in various directions, even single keywords may be sufficient.

Obstacles to Share Stories. Participants stated, there are three obstacles to share stories: Particular themes, particular people and particular atmospheres. Topics that prevent people from passing on are stories that drag them down emotionally, such as stories about diseases, war, childhood traumata or those which are too private, intimate or embarrassing. If there are persons present, participants do not sympathise with, they are not likely to tell their stories. A lack of trust also hinders storytelling. Likewise, the willingness to share stories is depending on the right discussion atmosphere. One participant stated that there must be a certain sentiment that a story is “is in good hands”.

Selection of Topics. Based on the sticky dots distribution, the preferred topics were childhood (12), family (10) and the terror attacks of 9/11 (9). See Fig. 3 for a graphical comparison. In open discussions, further ideas came apparent, in particular offering stimulus material regarding hobbies and occupations were wishes of the participants.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

Votes regarding topics of presented stimulus material. Each participant voted three times.

Full size image

Figure 4 shows the arrangement of the stimulus material for one participant. The sticky dots indicating the participants preferences are also in this picture.

Fig. 4.
figure 4

Stimulus material was pinned to wrapping paper. Each participant individually chose three items he found appealing (pink), he could tell a story about (purple) and that he found emotionally moving (green). (Color figure online)

Full size image

Afterwards, the point distribution suggestions for further topics were discussed within the group. Most important for their rating was their personal connection to a topic. A lack of connection often resulted in the selection of other materials. Challenges in the selection of materials are diverse. The participants declared that there may be no connection to a particular topic due to relatedness, such as the GDR or participants were too young or too old to have knowledge about a topic. But also personal preferences regarding topics influence the rating of stimulus material. One participant stated that she liked the topic “school” and “holiday” and another participant disliked the topic “marriage”. Emotional relevancy was also a discussed aspect, since participants stated that they need a emotional connection to the topic. On the other hand, participants reported that some topics may have a general relevance. They would like to share stories which have a reference to an historic event these are the stories that the next generation is more interested in, but have to be careful, because the stimulus material must not be too general either. Participants also shared suggestions for further topics, they would like to see in HT. Among these were school time, family feasts, birth of (grand)children, exams, comparisons of then and now, work, friendship, animals and regional topics.

Choice of Medium. In addition to the preference of topics, the effects of certain types of media were evaluated and classified. The results are presented according to appeal, inspirational power and emotionality. The provided questions scored highest on all three categories followed by stories and pictures. See Fig. 5 for more detailed information. A lot of comments focussing on the differences of several media types were collected. Only one participant stated that the presented media are nearly equivalent and that the topics are of more importance when telling stories.

Questions as stimulus for telling and writing stories were liked overall which is also reflected in the distribution of points. Especially, the conciseness was rated positively. On the other hand, participants stated that the particular questions used in the study lacked of conciseness did not address the right topics. Questions should acknowledge personal and emotional preferences to really inspire the participants.

The participants did not like Dates. Neither their appeal nor their inspirational or emotional characteristics were appreciated. They stated that there are only some specific dates that would work as inspiration, such as marriage dates and birthday but other than that there is no emotional connection to specific dates. As an improvement, participants suggested that a combination of texts and dates could be helpful to match dates and events.

Like dates, audio was rated low among the participants. Although the low rate of appeal, the participants commented that they overall liked listening to the audio, especially to short snippets such as “goal calls” at the soccer world championships 1954. Using audio presented two dilemmas. First, the used audio did not trigger emotions in the participants and thus did not work as a trigger for stories and second, participants stated that they rather use audio for collecting thoughts. Again, participants reported that the specific selection of audio was not appealing.

Fig. 5.
figure 5

Votes regarding the preferred media representation of the stimulus material.

Full size image

Pictures were liked among most of the participants. They stated that they are very appealing, of high relevance and can be more expressive than any other type of media. On the other hand, some of the selected pictures did not inspire the participants because the personal connection was missing.

Stories of events were rated as inspirational among the participants but lacked in the appeal and emotion. Regarding the appeal, especially the length and the style of the texts were commented as in need of improvement. They suggested to focus on headings and short text passages instead.

Prototype Evaluation. For the evaluation of the interface, it became apparent that especially the clear structure of the interface was assessed positively. Also, the participants rested their attention on images a long time. Half of the participants stated that pictures were most appealing, the other half stated that questions images were more important. Stimulus material was often not clicked and thus the detailed view with further information was not assessed.

4 Discussion

Due to the wishes of the second group, the workshop took part at the group leader’s home and the timetable of the workshop had to be adjusted (G5, G6). The participants arrived with time delays in groups of two. Thus, no introductions of the participants were carried out and the group discussions were executed in every small group.

It could be shown, that concise questions, pictures and unfamiliar stories worked best for stimulating personal stories, but the participants still had improvement proposals, especially regarding the presented topics. They stated, that they disliked some of the presented material, because they did not have an emotional connection to it. Thus, they could not tell a story inspired by these materials. Additionally, since the personal preferences of each participant was of high importance, for further HT development ways must be explored how data can be collected from users without making them feel insecure or exploited.

The low interest in the media type audio may be due to the presentation of the medium. Representative audio stimulus material in the form of an audio player was glued on the wrapping paper and then played externally by the workshop facilitators when selected.

Participants stated multiple times that atmosphere and people are important factors for sharing personal life stories and they would share particular stories only with particular people. Thus, there must be a strong emphasis on a user interface that offers a warm and welcoming atmosphere. This also shows us that a system that can be used on different devices at any time, such as Historytelling, is a good way to support telling and sharing personal life stories.

5 Conclusion

The conducted workshops served as a good method for gathering the required information regarding the type of stimulus material and the evaluation of the high fidelity prototype. In particular the combination of open discussions with the target group and individual task-based evaluation worked well. Also, the guidelines proposed by [16] supported the planning phase and the conduction of the workshops.

Further research must be conducted for example in terms of the reliability of outcomes of workshops held following the guidelines presented. The question arises as to whether the location of a workshop and thus the necessary adaptation has an effect on the results. Thus, we see this workshop as a good starting point for the practical implementation of the suggested guidelines. Nevertheless, further research is needed to identify more advanced guidelines which are relevant to the planning and conducting of workshops for older adults.

Currently, the individual components of HT are further refined and new input methods such as voice user input are implemented and tested, so that the HT system can be tested in a field study soon.