Courtney Martin Qualitative Study

INTRODUCTION
The speed at which cell phones have developed has led to their
ubiquitous use, both personally and professionally around the globe. The use
of touch screen smart phones in particular has significantly increased in the
last few years. The introduction of new uses for cell phones (ie. not just a
phone, but a camera, camcorder, web browser, GPS, etc.) increases the
complication of the technology. With the increase in the complication of the
technology, the phone-accessible web-based User Guides provided with the
phones must be easily accessible and be customizable. Users need to be
able to customize a guide to fit their learning style and technical ability
levels.
This is a descriptive study of how individuals engage with and interpret
their own learning from two forms of touch screen smart phone instruction.
The qualitative study involved observations of and interviews with purposely
chosen individuals. It aimed to better understand the correlation between
the use of instructions and the performance of a task.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Generational Gap
Can all generations learn to use the same technology? Smartphones
have become more complicated and more akin to computers in recent years.
There is a generation gap concerning the intuitive use of computer
technology, smartphones with touch screen technology in particular. In life
and in the workplace, this generational gap can cause serious issues.
Generation X tends to see those from the Silent Generation as incompetent
because of their lack of technological proficiency (Brown, 2004). This lack of
technological proficiency could be countered by accurate and intuitive
training on different technologies, including smartphones. Many problems
occur when IT initiatives fail to account for peoples everyday work habits,
underlying attitudes, and the engrained culture of the business (Salkowitz,
2006). Understanding how different generations use the interface between
the user and the software can lead to better technology use across
generations. Salkowitz (2006) notes that when it comes to generations and
technology, one size most certainly does not fit all. But perhaps with
research in to how different generations utilize the user guides and
interfaces, options can be incorporated to facilitate better use

transgenerationally. If the user guides can be altered per user, then each
user may have a better success rate.
User Interface/Usability
Mirel (2004) defines the usefulness of technology in terms of
accomplishing more complicated goals instead of simply using the
technology with ease. The first road block, though, is simply to use the
technology. According to WDSGlobal, One in seven mobile phones are sent
back as faulty - and more than half of those turn out to be working perfectly
but are too hard to set up (Branscombe, 2007). If people give up on new
technology before even being able to set up the basics, then it will never
reach the area of usefulness that Mirel defines. Improvement in set-up
guides and other user guides would result in more use of technology across
generations. With more use and familiarity, people will be more comfortable
with the technology and be able to accomplish greater goals. Apple
understands this use of continuity in allowing users to feel comfortable. In
her book that outlines how to develop an iPhone app, Suzanne Ginsburg
(2011) notes that Utility apps tend to incorporate the standard user
interface elements outlined in the HIG: the selected page, the Info button,
and the series of dots that indicate additional pages. Although custom user
interface elements may seem more aesthetically pleasing, they may slow
Utility app users down since they are less familiar. Therefore, ease of use
and familiarity are precursors to the usefulness of an app. If familiarity with
features is important, then a tutorial guide would give the user the ability to
become more familiar with the device. A User Guide App would be the best
solution to increase user interaction with the guide.
Educational Tactics
Pedagogy for all areas of education encourages the use of a tactile or
kinesthetic teaching strategy. Sensory experiences in early childhood
classrooms enhance the educational opportunities as children learn by using
their senses (Heath, 1994). It stands to reason that using multiple senses
such as sight and touch together would allow a person to learn more than
sight alone. Those who develop technology are not ignorant of this concept;
the area of how people learn has received much interest from tangible
interface designers.This interest is related to the more general view within
education that hands-on activity or manipulation of physical manipulatives
can be of particular educational benefit (Marshall, 2007). If the job of the
User Guide is to teach how to make use of the touch screen smartphone,

then pedagogy must be employed within the framework of developing the

User Guide. Therefore, it seems plausible that a smartphone user guide
would ensure a better user experience if a tactile, manipulative beginning
instructional practice were part of the startup programing. With better
instructional practice for a phone-based User Guide, different generations
would be more comfortable with the technology and there would be an
increase in usability.
Based on previous findings on the need for tactile instruction, the
importance of familiarity with technological interfaces, and the discrepancy
in generational use of technology, it is assumed that these three elements
are associated with an individuals ability to learn to use new technology. Do
these areas present a problem when learning to use a touch screen device?
Which teaching strategy, tactile practice or written instruction, engages
individuals more when learning to use a touch screen device? Therefore,
which of the teaching strategies should be incorporated into a digital phoneaccessible touch screen smart phone User Guide?
METHODS
This study primarily investigated the level of engagement found when
participants read or practiced instructions and how that level of engagement
affected a users ability to perform in an iPhone game that simulated a basic
interface with a touch screen device.
Participant Selection
Participants were chosen through a purposeful sampling method. The
reason for purposeful sampling was three-fold: 1) The participants were first
chosen only if each had not played or seen a game called Temple Run; 2) The
participants were chosen based on age ranges. The research required an
even distribution of ages for an accurate understanding of usability across
generations; and 3) The participants were chosen based on touch screen
device accessibility. Each of the three generational groups tested were
divided into two subgroups of those who regularly used a touch screen
device and those who did not. After the selection process, each subgroup
was divided in half. One half was treated as the control group and given
written instructions to play the game. The other half was allowed to use a
practice tutorial to learn to play the game.
Because of time and resource limitations, the participants were limited
to 12 individuals, one individual per the smallest division of the subgroups.
These individuals were chosen to participate in the experiment and were
interviewed after the completion of the experiment. In addition, extensive

notes were taken concerning the actions of the participants while interacting
with both the instructions for the game and the game itself.
Materials
Before delving into the research activity, I developed several
documents to be used in the field. These documents were all first written,
then two English teachers who also had experience with touch screen
devices and the Temple Run game read the documents and returned
comments.
First, a three point questionnaire was developed in order to find
participants who would fit with the purpose of the study. These questions
were simple: 1) Have you ever played the game Temple Run? 2) Within which
of the following age ranges do you fit: 18-29 years, 30-45 years, or 46-64
years? 3) Do you own or often use any touch screen device? The first
question was to ensure that none of the participants had any previous
experience with the game because of the need to measure the effectiveness
of the type of instruction given before the participant completes an activity
with which he/she is unfamiliar. The second was to ensure that the study
would have equal representation between the generally accepted divisions
between Generation Y, Generation X, and the Baby Boomers (PittCatsouphes, 2009). The third question was to place the participant in a
category of current technology experience. The two reviewers found no
reason to give comments on this document.
Second, a written set of instructions was developed for the portion of
the participants who would read instructions rather than use the tutorial (see
Appendix A). The written instructions describe the same instructions given
in the tutorial. The original instructions were organized differently. One of
the reviewers suggested that a When to section be added to each of the
instructions. This feature was added to help the readers better understand
what should be done during the game. The second reviewer commented on
a similar need of division. The second reviewer also stated that the reading
instructions did not mention the special features of the game that the player
would want in order to perform better. This was not added to the
instructions as the tutorial did not mention these features either. Omitting
these instructions helped to ensure equity between the two instruction
methods.
Third, a pre-administration directions script was written so that all
administrations of the experiment would be conducted in an equal
environment (see Appendix B). This script helps to ensure that the
researcher did not change the conditions surrounding the experiment.
Neither reviewers had any suggestions for revision.

Fourth, a check list with expected behaviors was created to make

observations of the participants faster to record. These characteristics were
chosen based on the two reviewers behaviors while reading the instructions
as well as practicing the tutorial and game. A few characteristics that might
denote emotional responses not seen in the reviews were also added to the
check list.
Lastly, a post-experiment interview was conducted with each
participant. The main questions to be considered were written before any of
the experiments were conducted. On several occasions during the
interviews, follow-up questions were needed to clarify meaning from the
participants. The two reviewers found no need for revisions from the original
set of interview questions (see Appendix C).
Instructional Methods
All of the participants were equally divided between the two
instructional methods being tested, tactile practice and written instruction.
The tutorial created by the makers of the game Temple Run begins when the
chosen participant presses play. In the instance of the tutorial instructed
user, I had previously turned the tutorial on so that it will teach the
participant about the game. As the tutorial begins, the games character
runs onto the screen. Before practice of a skill for the game, instructions to
Swipe to Turn with arrows indicating direction appear on the screen. As a
turn approaches, an animated arrow moves in the direction that the
participant should swipe. The action is then practiced three times, turning in
different directions. If the participant does not perform the action correctly,
it is repeated. The same instructional method is employed for each aspect of
playing the game, including the three chances to practice each action. In
addition to teaching the participants how to turn, it teaches Swipe to Jump,
Swipe to Slide, and Tilt to Collect Coins. As soon as the tutorial was
completed, each of the participants saw the message Youre Ready. Good
Luck and the game started immediately. The other half of the participants
read the written directions (see Appendix A), pressed Play on the game,
and played the same game.
Procedure
Appointments were made with the selected participants. The
participants were pre-assigned to subgroups based on the answers found
from the questionnaire (see Appendix D). I conducted the experiment with
each participant individually. All participants were high school teachers with
similar educational backgrounds. Each participated in his or her own
classroom, so the environment was familiar to the participant. I read the preadministration script to the participants who then completed the preassigned instructional method for how to play the game Temple Run on an

iPhone. I took notes on each individuals interaction with the instructional

method. After the instructional process, each participant played one round
of the game while I again took notes. The score was recorded for each
participant, and I conducted a post-experiment interview. The interview
notes were read by the researcher and coded for data analysis. Two
category headings were created from the data.
RESULTS
Body Movements During Instructions
Every participant who read the instructions pulled their eyebrows in
and down at some point while reading. According to the participants in the
post-game interview, they did this to both concentrate on the instructions
and to try to visualize the instructions. One participant stated that she was
trying to figure out what I will have to do in the game; I think I was trying to
see it. Another participant noted that he was just thinking about how I
would apply the instructions. Only one person who completed the tutorial
pulled his eyebrows in and down. He stated, I think that was when I had
missed a couple slides and I was annoyed. According to Givens (2008), all
could be correct in their assessment of the eyebrow lowering. Eyebrow
lowering can be associated with both concentration and annoyance.
Of the six reading participants four sighed at some point during the
reading. The participants agreed that the sighs indicated that reading the
instructions was more tiresome and that these individuals would not have
read instructions in other circumstances (ie. if they were not participating in
the study). One participant noted, It has just been a long day, and I was
trying to understand what I read. Another stated, Um, Im tired I guess.
Reading directions is not the most fun. None of the participants who used
the tutorial sighed while learning the game.
Each of the participants who used the tutorial smiled some time during
the tutorial. Five of the six participants using the tutorial also laughed while
learning the game. Not one person who read the instructions smiled or
laughed while reading. One participant noted the reason for her smiles and
laughter during the tutorial, I guess because I enjoyed the tutorial; it was
like playing a gameI like this game, too; Im going to download it. After
seeing a pattern emerge where those who read did not smile or laugh during
instructions and those who used the tutorial did, I added another questions
to the interview with those who read instructions. After asking them about
an action they did while reading, I asked why they did not smile or laugh.
One participant stated, I suppose reading the directions was more like work
than fun.
Participant Evaluation of Instructional Method Effectiveness

Participants responded that both the tutorial and the written

instructions were effective. During the interview, participants rated each
instructional method on a scale of 1 10, where 1 meant that it did not
prepare the participant at all and 10 meant that the participant could not
have been more prepared before playing the game. For the written
instructions, the ratings ranged from 7 to 10, this included only one 7 and
only one 10. Every participant using the tutorial rated it as a 10. Concerning
the tutorial, one participant noted that:
It told you first what action to perform, then I was able to
practice it. I just missed doing it correctly when the game
started. If I played again, I would do so much better. I already
know how to do all the actions required; I think I was waiting for
the game to tell me to jump when that was part of the tutorial.
She felt it was not the instructions for the actions, but her need to practice
the timing that caused her character to die in the game. All of the
participants, both those who read and those who completed the tutorial,
seemed to agree that actually seeing the game would improve their
performance. Another participant who read instructions noted that seeing it
put all the directions together for me, while a third participant who used the
tutorial stated that seeing the speed of the actual game will help me play
the next time.
The participants thought that dividing the instructions, both written
and tutorial, into sections was helpful. All instruction methods divided the
instructions by the actions that should be performed. One participant stated
that the written instructional method was effective because it was
organized by task, then how and when to complete the task. Another
participant who used the tutorial also commented on the structure of the
instructions stating that it told you first what action to perform, then I was
able to practice it. The order and division of instructions were important to
the effectiveness of the instructions.
DISCUSSION
Tradition, common sense, and science converge in seeing the face as
a window with a view opening onto our emotions (Russell, 1997). Based,
then, on the smiles and laughter, it seems appropriate to determine that a
tactile interface would be the preferred method of instructional practice over
reading instructions. Indeed, eleven of the twelve participants stated in the
interview that they prefer to learn through hands-on activities. Even the one
person who stated she preferred to read instructions did not read her
phones instructions and did not even know there were written instructions
on her phone. In fact, none of the participants knew if there were phonebased user guides on their phones. (After checking specifications for each

phone the participants reported using, each phone had user instructions to
some extent on the phone.) All twelve of the participants reported that they
learned to use their cell phones by trial and error (side note: Eleven of the
twelve actually used the exact phrase trial and error). Taking this trial and
error method as a norm for many people who use a new cell phone in
conjunction with the higher effectiveness rating of the tutorial, it seems
plausible to determine that having written instructions somewhere in the
touch screen phone is an outdated method for technical communication.
Considering that those who read instructions seemed to be annoyed and
unhappy about reading, it becomes imperative to technical communicators
that instructions are adapted to how the technology is used and to the needs
of the user. The greatest set of written instructions is useless if no one
actually reads it. Having an easily accessible app on touch screen phones
would increase use; having that same app be a set of practicable actions also
would increase use.
CONCLUSIONS
It seems more important from this study that a User Guide be both
easily accessible and customizable. This would allow people of different
experience and learning styles to reap the most benefit from a User Guide.
Of course, for one to get any benefit from a User Guide one must actually
access it. Since people who get a new touch screen smart phone are on
those different levels of experience, an app that is both easily accessible and
can teach beginner, intermediate, and advanced users is important. The
ability for such a tutorial to differentiate by user would encourage more use
by the general public.
RESOURCES
Branscombe, M. (2007). Ten tips for smartphone users. FT.Com, 1. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/229077712?accountid=10639;
http://jw3mh2cm6n.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.882004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ
%3Aabiglobal&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.j
title=FT.com&rft.atitle=Ten+tips+for+smartphone+users&rft.au=Branscomb
e%2C+Mary&rft.aulast=Branscombe&rft.aufirst=Mary&rft.date=2007-1205&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=FT.co
m&rft.issn
Brown, J. (2004). Mind the gap: Managing the generational divide. Unpublished
manuscript, Business Dept., Retrieved from
http://www.obscure.org/~perky/uofr/fall2004/MGMT341U/MindtheGap.pdf

Pitt-Catsouphes, M. et al (2009). Age & generations: Understanding experiences at

the workplace. The Sloan Center on Aging & Work at Boston College.
Retrieved from http//www.bc.edu/agingandwork
Ginsburg, S. (2011). Designing the iphone user experience: A user-centered
approach to sketching and prototyping iphone apps. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Addison-Wesley. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?
id=9ccyxlV20MQC&pg=PP15&lpg=PP5&ots=5t4jbS-XJn&dq=most used
iphone apps&lr=
Givens, D. (2008). The nonverbal dictionary of gestures, signs & body language
cues. Center for nonverbal studies press.
http://www.mikolaj.info/edu/Body_Language_-_List_of_Signs_n_Gestures.pdf
Heath, P. (1994). Developing tactile learning experiences. Early childhood education
journal, 22(2), 12 - 13. doi: 10.1007/BF02361324
Marshall, Paul (2007). Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? In: Proceedings of
the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, 15-17
February 2007, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.
Mirel, B. (2004). Interaction design for complex problem solving: Developing useful
and usable software. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
O'Neal, L. (2011, December 12). Top 10 most used iphone apps. Techli. Retrieved
from http://techli.com/2011/12/top-10-most-used-iphone-apps-infographic/
Russell, J. A., & Fernandez-Dols, J. M. (1997). What does a facial expression mean?.
In J. Russell & J. Fernandez-Dols (Eds.), The psychology of facial expression.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Salkowitz, R. (2006). Generation blend: Managing across the technology age gap.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com/books?id=N61g62y3vKsC&printsec

Appendix A
Temple Run Instructions
Your character has taken something from a temple. Monkeys are now chasing your
character. The object of the game is to survive running away from the monkeys for
as long as possible while collecting coins. The game is scored both by earning
points and by distance run in meters.
You must avoid obstacles either by jumping over them, sliding under them, or
moving to the side.

To Jump, use your finger on the screen of the phone to swipe in an upward motion.
When to jump:
Before broken areas in the path
Before an obstacle that does not require the character to slide under it
To Turn a Corner, use your finger on the screen of the phone to swipe in direction of
the turn.
For example, if the character needs to turn right at a corner, you should place
your finger on the screen and swipe to the right.
To Slide Under an Obstacle, use your finger on the screen of the phone to swipe in a
downward motion.
When to slid:
Just before any obstacle that has a partial clear area above the path
To move to one side of the path, tilt the phone in the direction you wish the
character to move.
When to move to the side:
There are coins to the side of the path
Part, but not all, of the path has been broken
To Collect Coins:
As the character runs, move the character from side to side so that he runs into the
coins.

Appendix B
Pre-Administration Directions
Thank you for participating in my research.
Reading Directions
I will now give you written directions for playing the game. Please read the
directions carefully. When you are finished reading, I will give you my iphone. You
should click play, and the game will begin. After your character dies the first time,
the experiment is over. I will have a few questions for you after you play the game.

Tutorial Directions
I am going to give you my iphone. You should click play, and the tutorial will
begin. If you character dies while you are completing the tutorial, it will
automatically restart where you need to learn. As soon as the tutorial has taken
you through the basic operation of the game, you will read, Youre Ready. Good
Luck, on the screen. The tutorial is over at this point and the game has started.
After your character dies the first time during the game, the experiment is over. I
will have a few questions for you after you play the game.

Appendix C
After game interview:
1. Have you ever played a game similar to Temple Run?
2. How do you rate the instructions you were given for playing the game on a
scale of 1 10 with 1 meaning that it did not prepare you at all and 10
meaning that you could not have learned more before playing the game?
3. What do you think made the instructions (NOT depending on the answer to
the previous question) effective?
4. How prepared do you feel to play the game again?
5. During the instructions, you did __________. Why do you think you did this?
6. How did you learn to use your cell phone (or another piece of technology)?
7. Do you have a user guide on your cell phone?
a. If yes, how often to you use it?
b. If yes, how would you rate the effectiveness of your user guide in
helping you to use your phone? Rate on a scale from 1 10 where 1
means it is not effective at all and 10 means that it could not be more
effective.
8. What method of instruction do you think typically helps you to learn in
general?

Appendix D
Sub-group Assignments
Age
Range

18 -

Direction
Syle

Read
Directions

29
years Tutorial

30 -

Read
Directions

45
years Tutorial

46 -

Read
Directions

64
years Tutorial

Touch Screen Experience

Has never
owned
Has owned and
used one for at
nor used for
least six
extended time. months.
Participant #1

Participant #2

Participant #3

Participant #4

Participant #5

Participant #6

Participant #7

Participant #8

Participant #9
Participant
#11

Participant
#10
Participant
#12