Article published in:
Information Design Journal
Vol. 25:3 (2019) ► pp. 294300
Black, A., Luna, P., Lund, O., & Walker, S.
(Eds.) (2017) Information design: research and practice. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. M., Mack, R. L., Lewis, C. H., Grischkowsky, N. L., & Robertson, S. R.
(1985) Exploring a word processor. Human Computer Interaction, 1(3), 283–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, J., & Wright, P.
(2008) Older readers can be distracted by embellishing graphics in text. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(5), 740–757. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kolers, P. A., Wrolstad, M. E., & Bouma, H.
(Eds.) (1980) Processing of Visible Language 2. New York, NY: Plenum Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J.
(2003) Universal Principles of Design. Gloucester, MA: Rockport Publishers.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J.
(1993) Usability Engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, J., & Budiu, R.
(2012) Mobile usability: Synopsis of iPad problems. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A.
(2011) Living with complexity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Office for National Statistics
(2020) Frequency of internet use by age group, Great Britain: 2019. Release date 18 February 2020. In Statistical bulletin: Internet users 2019. Ref number 11293. Great Britain: Office for National Statistics.Google Scholar
Raskin, J.
(2000) The humane interface: New directions for designing interactive systems. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Redish, J.
(2007) Letting go of the words: Writing web content that works. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Sharp, H., Rogers, Y., & Preece, J.
(2019) Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction (5th ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Schriver, K. A.
(1997) Dynamics in document design. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Soroka, A. J., Wright, P., Belt, S., Pham, D. T., Dimov, S., De Roure, D. C., & Petrie, H.
(2006) User choices for modalities of instructional information. Proceedings of 4th International IEEE Conference on Industrial Informatics (pp. 16–18). INDIN’06. August 2006, Singapore. Crossref
Te’eni, D., Carey, J., & Zhang, P.
(2007) Human computer interaction: Developing effective organizational information systems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. R.
(1983) The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
Wong, C. Y., Ibrahim, R., Hamid, T. A., & Mansor, E. I.
(2020) Measuring expectation for an affordance gap on a smartphone user interface and its usage among older adults. Human Technology, 16(1), 6–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P.
(1971) Writing to be understood: Why use sentences? Applied Ergonomics, 2(4), 207–209, 61, 93–134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1977) Presenting technical information: A survey of research findings. Instructional Science, 61, 93–134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1978) Feeding the information eaters: Suggestions for integrating pure and applied research on language comprehension. Instructional Science, 7(3), 249–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1979) The quality control of document design. Information Design Journal, 1(1), 33–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1988) The need for theories of NOT reading: Some psychological aspects of the human-computer interface. In B. A. G. Elsendoorn & H. Bouma (Eds.), Working models of human perception (pp. 319–340). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Talking computers and diversity in older audiences. Gerontechnology, 4(4), 187–189. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P., Belt, S., & John, C.
(2003) Fancy graphics can deter older users: A comparison of two interfaces for exploring healthy lifestyle options. In E. O’Neill, P. Palanque, & P. Johnson (Eds.), People and computers 17: Proceedings of HCI 2003: Designing for society (pp. 315–325). London: Springer-Verlag (London) Ltd.Google Scholar
Wright, P., Creighton, P., & Threlfall, S. M.
(1982) Some factors determining when instructions will be read. Ergonomics, 25(3), 225–237. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P., Lickorish, A., Hull, A. J., & Umellen, N.
(1995) Graphics in written directions: Appreciated by readers not by writers. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 41–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P., & Reid, F.
(1973) Written information: Some alternatives to prose for expressing the outcomes of complex contingencies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(2), 160–166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P., Soroka, A. J., & Belt, S.
(2010) Audio changes how older people follow animations. Gerontechnology, 9(2), 340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P., Soroka, A. J., Belt, S., Pham, D., Dimov, S., DeRoure, D., & Petrie, H.
(2008) Modality preference and performance when seniors consult online information. Gerontechnology, 7(3), 293–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar