Wright P, Rogers N, Hall C, Wilson B, Evans J, Emslie H, Bartram C
School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Brain Inj. 2001 Sep;15(9):787-800. doi: 10.1080/02699050110045161.
Two styles of pocket computer memory aid were compared as support for people who had sustained non-progressive, closed-head brain injury. A purpose-designed interface provided a diary with auditory alarms, a notebook and links between diary entries and specific notepages. One computer had a physical keyboard, the other did not. Twelve adult volunteers were loaned each computer for 2 months, with a 1 month gap between, in counterbalanced order. It was found that all participants could use the memory aids, and most (83%) found them useful. Little customizing was needed, but amount of use varied widely. Predictors of usage included use of other reminding systems before joining the project, and speed in calculator addition which may reflect working memory. High users preferred the computer with a physical keyboard; low users made more entries with the palm-size computer. These data highlight the need to distinguish ability to use from willingness to use.
