The populational aging is evidenced as a worldwide phenomenon. For 2050, a demographic research from the Berlin-Institute (2013) estimates that about 80 percent of people over 60 will be living in today's developing countries. With the growth of the elderly population globally, it should be considered that besides the adequacy of products, services and assistance to the elderly, this same public will spend a longer time in their profession before actually retiring. For this reason, the work environment, tools and work stations, should be adequate to the physical and cognitive declines of this generation. Thus it is necessary to ascertain what are social and economic changes that will occur for this new phase of industrialization. Changing requirements for work are the new challenge in designing human-machine interfaces for industrial goods. The latter will be part of web of things as cyber-physical production systems (CPPS) and operating CPS will be new challenge to operators from different culture backgrounds and ages. On the one hand, the full automation will bring positive aspects on product development. On the other hand, what are the social consequences that will be felt for this new production system. Reports around working Group for Industry 4.0 showed the needs to attend social and technical improvements to ergonomic design of work systems so as the qualification requirements for employees. Furthermore, it pointed out that the increasing age of employees must be taken into account regarding prospective ergonomic workplace design Kager-mann (2013) cited by Dombrowski & Wagner (2014). Studies related to thermal comfort, acoustic, posture, efficiency, effectiveness and learning levels are treated massively in the areas of cognitive science and ergonomics (Iida 2002, Hignett 2008, Grandjean 2005). Methods such as usability tests of direct human performance at levels of easily observable tasks for evaluation. They may be driven so that it evaluates the time to complete a task, percentage of participants to perform the tasks successfully, type and number of identified errors, or the subjective degrees of ease of use; criteria measured by a particular score achieved or medium ranges (rating) of results between participants (Norman 2006, Bevan 1991, 1995, Seffah & Matzker 2004). Authors as Hassenzahl und Tractinsky (2006) see the User Experience as a counterpoint of usability. While the usability analyzes functional and measured qualities of a product, UX methods analyzes its subjective and not measurable qualities.
|Title of host publication||USEWARE 2016|
|Publisher||VDI Verlag, Düsseldorf|
|Number of pages||4|
|Publication status||Published - 2016|
|Title||8th VDI / VDE Symposium on Human-Technology Interaction in the Age of Industry, USEWARE 2016|
|Duration||6 - 7 October 2016|