STID3113 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IN IT
Semester 1 Session 2018/2019 (A181)
Assignment 2: Review Table
Example of Review Table
Author/ Problem Factors/ Methodology Data/ Results Comments
Year Statements Key Sample
points
Savinder Tracing the Culture, Qualitative Survey Mixing with other
Kaur Gill history of Indian , and quantitative Questionnaire religion can cause
and Nirmala religious Older lose touch in own
Devi Gopal culture in generation, culture.
(2010) India as well Younger
as in generation
Malaysia
since there
is a general
concern
among older
generation
that the
younger
generation,
will lose
touch with its
ancient
cultural .
Ladonne Older Adults’ Older Qualitative Surveys and Found a significant
Wilson, Attitude generation and quantitative Interviews . correlation
toward New Technology between age and
[Link] Communicati attitudes toward
Magsamen- on new
Conrad current communication
Ph.D* technologies technologies.
Older adults’ are
more likely to have
negative
feelings towards
NCTs.
Tim Broady, Differences Older Qualitative A survey Research has
Amy Chan between the generation and quantitative involving 384 shown that
and Peter attitudes Younger people ranging negative
Caputi and generation from 20 to 75 stereotypes of
acceptance of Technologies years old older people being
technology avoidant of
by older and technology
younger and incapable of its
people use are outdated.
s research has
focused on
themes such
as how older
people
respond to
new
technologies,
their attitudes
towards
computers
and their
abilities to
learn how to
use them.
Eleftheria Older Adults Older adults' Qualitative Survey and The themes that
Vaportzis, Perceptions current and quantitative interview on emerged were
Maria Giatsi of technology. eighteen older related to barriers
Clausen,2 Technology adults (65–76 (i.e., lack of
and and Barriers years old). instructions and
Alan J. to Interacting guidance, lack of
Gow, with Tablet knowledge and
Computers confidence, health-
related barriers,
cost);
disadvantages and
concerns (i.e., too
much and too
complex
technology,
feelings of
inadequacy, and
comparison with
younger
generations, lack of
social interaction
and
communication,
negative features
of tablets);
advantages (i.e.,
positive features of
tablets, accessing
information,
willingness to
adopt technology);
and skepticism
. about using tablets
and technology in
general.
References:
Ponnusamy WM 2010. Malaysian Indian Minority and
Human Rights Violations Annual Report 2009- Malaysia Truly Racist. Conference
paper presented at Pravasi Bharathiya Divas International Conference,
Vigyan Bhawan New Delhi held from 7-9 January 2010.
Star T. 2007, December 15. NGOs Discuss Indian Issues With PM in Heart-to-heart
Chat- December 15,2007. Kuala Lumpur
Magsamen-Conrad, K., Wang, F, Tettah, D., & Lee,
Y-I. (2015, April). Generational differences inNCTs: An intergroup investigation of
UTAUT determinants, computer-email-web fluency, and ehealth literacy. Paper to
be presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Communication Association
(Communication and Technology Interest Group), Philadelphia, PA. TOP PAPER
AWARD. Under Review.
Mercer, A. (2009). Technology evolution. The Canadian Music Educator, 51(1), 43.
Olson, K. E., O’Brien, M. A., Rogers, W. A., &Charness, N. (2011). Diffusion of
technology: Frequency of use for younger and older adults.
Ageing International, 36(1), 123-145. doi:10.1007/s12126-010-9077-9
Yzer, M. C., & Southwell, B. G. (2008). New communication technologies, old
questions. The American Behavioral Scientist [[Link] - SSA], 52(1), 8.
Abdullah, F. (1994). Urbanisasi dan Kekeluargaan. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Universiti Malaya.
Bakalian, A. (1993). Armenian Americans: From Being to Feeling American. New
Jersey: Transaction Publisher.
Bermudez, O. I., & Tucker, K. L. (2004). Cultural aspects of food choices in various
communities of elders. Food and Nutrition for
Healthier Aging, 22-27
Alvseike H., Brønnick K. (2012). Feasibility of the iPad as a hub for smart house
technology in the elderly; Effects of cognition, self-efficacy, and technology
experience. J. Multidiscip. Healthc. 5, 299–306. 10.2147/JMDH.S35344 [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
Anderson N. B., Bulatao R. A., Cohen B. (2004). Critical Perspectives on Racial and
Ethnic Differences in Health in Late Life. Washington, DC: National Academies
Press.
Bailey A., Ngwenyama O. (2010). Bridging the generation gap in ICT use:
interrogating identity, technology and interactions in community telecenters. Inf.
Technol. Dev. 16, 62–82. 10.1080/02681100903566156 [CrossRef]
Balagtas-Fernandez F., Forrai J., Hussmann H. (2009). Evaluation of user interface
design and input methods for applications on mobile touch screen devices, in
Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2009: 12th IFIP TC 13 International
Conference (Uppsala), Proceedings, Part I (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin
Heidelberg; ), 243–246.
Baltes P. B. (1997). On the incomplete architecture of human ontogeny: selection,
optimization, and compensation as foundation of developmental theory. Am.
Psychol. 52, 366–380. 10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.366 [PubMed] [CrossRef]
Author/ Year Problem Factors/ Key Methodology Data/Sam Results Comments
Statements points ple
Sebastiaan T.M. Since qualitative, 1000 Acceptan
Peek, Eveline technology Aged, quantitative participan ce of
J.M. Wouters, acceptance Technology or mixed ts are technolog
Joost van Hoof, factors methods communit y in the
Katrien G. fluctuate over research. y- pre-
Luijk,Hennie R. time, a dwelling implemen
Boeije, Hubertus distinction older tation
J.M. Vrijhoef / 10 was made adults stage is
January 2014 between aged 60 influence
factors in the years or d by
pre- older multiple
implementati factors.
on stage and However,
factors in the post-
post- implemen
implementati tation
on stage. research
on
technolog
y
acceptanc
e by
communit
y-
dwelling
older
adults is
scarce
and most
of the
factors in
this
review
have not
been
tested by
using
quantitati
ve
methods.
Fiorella Older adults qualitative survey In
Marcellini, complain Older method conducted the
Heidrun about having people, in 5 present
Mollenkopf, difficulties Technology European generatio
Isto Ruoppila, with user countries n of
interfaces. was people
Zsuzsa Széman Dutch aimed at aged 55
research the years and
reported in enhancem older, the
2002 showed ent of share of
that half out-of- users for
of older home most
people did mobility technolog
not use of 2500 ies
modern older (PC,
technology people. internet,
that could electronic
make life banking)
easier. is low,
but these
users are
rather
satisfied
with
these.
Apparentl
y,
elderly
people
feel
barriers to
start
using new
technolog
ies. A
high
education
al level, a
high
income,
and a
good
health
offer
good
condition
s for
overcomi
ng these
barriers.
Tsai-Hsuan Tsai, Questionnair A total of All of the
Hsien-Tsung Given a Older e surveys 101 older hypothese
Chang, Yan-Jiun certain stage people,socia adults s
Chen, Yung- of life and l, were proposed
Sheng Chang living Technology enrolled in this
environment, in this study
individuals, study as were
in particular subjects. valid:
older people system
after support
retirement, and
respond perceived
rather usefulnes
differently to s
social had a
networks. significan
Because of t effect on
environmenta behaviora
l l
restrictions, intention;
seniors who user
once spent interface
most of their design
time at work and
and perceived
established ease of
social use were
interactions positively
in their correlated
workplaces with
often find it perceived
difficult, usefulnes
once retired, s; and
to expand the navigatio
scope n exerted
of their social an
lives and influence
maintain their on
earlier social perceived
relations. ease of
Furthermore, use. The
age-related results of
deterioration this study
of are
physiological valuable
functions and for the
senses limit future
opportunities developm
for social ent
contact. of social
applicatio
ns for the
elderly.
Casey In research Questionnair A total of there is
Schonhardt(2015 conducted by Older e surveys 100 older no
) Van Volkon, adults, adults indication
Stapley, and Technology, were that it
Amaturo younger enrolled will
(2014), the generation in this hinder
older study as technolog
population subjects. y
reports being acceptanc
frustrated e for
with older
technology. adults.
Most have The
had less positive
experience experienc
with es and
touch screen relationsh
devices, and ips the
are more tablet
likely to feel classes
like can
innovation in provide
the will effect
technology perceptio
department is ns on
too fast paced usability
(Larsson, and ease
Larsson- of use,
Lund, & resulting
Nilsson, in a more
2013). positive
attitude
about the
technolog
y as a
whole.
JOLIE C.Y. the role of Questionnair involving the
LAM & Internet self- Older e surveys and almost findings
MATTHEW efficacy and adults, cognitive 1,000 in the
K.O. LEE / outcome Internet, knowledge participan longitudi
08 Dec 2014 expectations assessments ts. nal study
of older were (includin
adults' is conducted. g three
facing a repeated
difficulties in measures)
usage of the validated
Internet the
affects of
Internet
self-
efficacy
and
outcome
expectati
ons on
usage
intention,
and the
important
roles of
support
and
encourag
ement in
the
formation
of self-
efficacy
and
outcome
expectati
ons.
Author/ Year Problem Factors/ Key Methodology Data/Sam Results Comments
Statements points ple
Auerbach, Technology People, Qualitative 3000 The
Dathan Kahn, negatively Technology and participanevolution
1984 affects people quantitative ts were of
all over the involved technolog
[Link] in this y has
society has survey. brought
been changed so many
with the changes
evolution of to
technology. humans
Life was daily
burdensome lifestyle.
and everyday This can
chores be
consumed too conclude
much of our d by the
time, before survey
the advent of done
modern day among
technology. the
people in
this era.
Murray, The relation Questionnair survey Cultures
James S. of the new India e Survey conducted of India
(James technology to Culture, in Indian can
Stephen) culture is Technology country Survive
especially the
vivid and Informati
pressing in on Age.
India. For of By
all modern informati
states, India on age,
is the one most
which has particular
most ly the age
successfully brought
preserved, about by
and even the new
enhanced, technolog
multiple ies of
languages computati
and cultures, on and
plural computer
literatures mediated
and communi
traditions, cation,
extraordinary but also
cultural television
diversity. , film,
radio, and
all of the
new
media.
Gretzky, Wayne E-mail Questionnair involving In the
invitations to Invitations, e surveys almost Scottish
general Technology 1,000 context,
practitioners participan inviting
were as ts. GPs to
effective as take part
postal in an
invitations online
and were trial by e-
more mail does
efficient. not
adversely
affect
recruitme
nt and is
logisticall
y easier
and
cheaper
than
using
postal
invitation
s.
Thomas, William Older Questionnair A total of As we
J (2016) generatio Older e surveys 100 older know
ns and adults, adults older
people younger were generatio
know a lot generation enrolled ns have a
of in this lot of
important study as stories of
skills like subjects. their past
how to and
knit or things
how to that they
have gone
vote
through.
compared
It’s hard
to to say
younger that a
generatio younger
n. generatio
n can
teach an
older
generatio
n
anything.
After all
they have
just
barely
went
through
life
Baron, David, Indian Questionnair involving There are
MacNeal wedding Invitation, e surveys almost different
invitation Indian 1,000 rules of
etiquette Culture participan etiquette
differs ts. for
slightly from wedding
other invitation
cultures. s in every
culture,
and
Indian
invitation
s are no
exception
. Though,
the rules
for
sending
Indian
wedding
invitation
s are
generally
the same
as other
cultures,
there are
few
different
rules that
must be
followed
when
sending
an
invitation
to an
Indian
wedding.
Author/Year Problem Factors/ Methodolog Data/Sampl Results Comment
Statement Key points y e s
s
K.S. Method use Questionnaire Indian In Indian Indian
Muthukrishnan to invite community / culture they community
(2017) people to Simple wish to still
[Tamil Malar events in Random follow the supports
newspaper] Indian Sampling traditional and follow
culture way the
Most people generation traditional
using the by method.
traditional generation
method to even
invite people though
to attend an there are
event in many ways
Indian culture to inviting
rather than people such
using e- as e-
invitation. invitation.
Rubaa Usage of Normal The methods Stratified E-invitation Older
Shunmuganatha normal invitation card used in Random introduce generation
n (13 July 2017) invitation is a traditional conducting Sampling by younger perception
card and e- method to survey. generation about the E-
invitation invite guests and the Invitation
among the to an event Older
Older and they will generation
generation go to the refuse to
guest’s house follow E-
and invite invitation
them with the method
invitation because the
card. assume it as
non-proper
way
method
Cyril F. Attitudes Older people Conducted Cluster Older Older
Brickfie1d and appear telephone sampling people have generation
(2016) Perceptions to be more interviews less and their
of Older reluctant than with a positive knowledge
People younger representative views about
toward people in sample of 750 toward a current
Technology acknowledgin adults 45years variety technology
g the value of or older who of
newer, less live in various technologie
familiar forms parts of the s than do
of technology. nation younger
(interview) people and
they are
also less
likely to
use the
new
products
of
technolo
gy.
P. S. R. Murty Indian In way of Conducted Simple Face to face Acceptance
(2015) events and Indian culture, interview Random approach s and
invitation they accept Sampling will give attendance
methods the traditional more of guests.
method as confident to
respectful and guest to
proper way to attend the
invite guests. event
Rakesh K. Indian In Invitation Conducted Among 20 – When Perception
Chadda (2000) Cultural and card one or survey 30 family comparing of guest on
Etiquette to two printed to E- types of
invite a pages that invitation invitation
guest for an mention event and normal
occasion details and invitation,
invitee’s in E-
details and invitation
there will be will be
few more simpler and
details usually lack of
included. details and
its makes
guests
confused
