Abstract
Methods to involve users in design have long been used to create relevant content and increase the accuracy of product development. Demographic trends have raised the issue of the needs and demands of older people, especially with regard to digitization. In contrast to the high number of publications discussing the importance of involving people in the design of their daily life, very few publications suggest how to do it. While participatory design is used with older people, there is no common understanding about which methods are used for what purposes. This paper presents a framework methodology that further advances the opportunity to involve older people in the design process and increase understanding of old people’s subjective experience of getting their lives digitized and how to involve them in design. Given that digitalization, with its systemic complexity, requires an understanding of how technology is contextualized, the need to understand what it means to age in today’s digital society is part of successful design. One objective is to go beyond stereotypes that often characterize generalizations of older people. We are using the concept of co-design, which is well established but not specifically adapted to older users. The goal is a matrix of tested co-design methods to be used by citizens, researchers, businesses or anyone who is interested in increasing the impact of old people on the design of new technologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bratteteig, T., Wagner, I.: Disentangling Participation. Power and Decision-Making in Participatory Design. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06163-4
Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., Maguire, P.: Why action research? Action Res. 1(1), 9–28 (2003)
Gunnarsson, L., Perby, M.-L.: Forskningscirklar: en metod i facklig kunskapsuppbyggnad (Research circles: a method in trade union knowledg buidling). Report 33. Arbetslivscentrum, Stockholm (1982)
Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action, 4th edn. Ashgate, Aldershot (1999)
Arnstein, S.R.: A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 35(4), 216–224 (1969)
Dreyfuss, H.: Designing for People. Allworth Press, New York (1955)
Righi, V., Sayago, S., Ferreira, S., Rosales, A., Blat, J.: Co-designing with a community of older learners for over 10 years by moving user-driven participation from the margin to the centre. CoDes. Int. J. CoCreation 14, 32–44 (2018)
Botero, A., Hyysalo, S.: Ageing together: steps towards evolutionary co-design in everyday practices. CoDes. Int. J. CoCreation Des. Arts 9(1), 37–41 (2013)
Wright, P., McCarthy, J.: The politics and aesthetics of participatory HCI. Interact. Mag. 22, 26–31 (2015)
Grand, S., Jonas, W.: Mapping Design Research: Positions and Perspectives (Board of International Research in Design) Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH (2012)
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Evenson, S.: Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 493–502. ACM (2007)
Frayling, C.: Research in art and design. R. Coll. Art. Res. Pap. 1(1), 1–5 (1993)
Latour, B.: Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)
Knorr, C.K.: Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1999)
Munoz, S.-A., Macaden, L., Kyle, R., Webster, E.: Revealing student nurses’ perceptions of human dignity through curriculum co-design. Soc. Sci. Med. 174, 1–8 (2017)
Östlund, B.: The revival of research circles: to meet the needs of modern ageing and the third age. Educ. Gerontol. 34(4), 255–266 (2017)
Swann, C.: Action research and practice of design. Des. Issues 18(2), 49–61 (2002)
Story, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J.: The Universal Design File, Designing for All Ages and Abilities. The Center for Universal Design North Carolina State University, Raleigh (1998)
Waller, S., Bradley, M., Hosking, I., Clarkson, J.: Making the case for inclusive design. Appl. Ergon. 46, 297–303 (2015)
Preiser, W., Ostroff, E.: Universal Design Handbook. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York (2001)
Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A.A., Gulliksen, J.: Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 14(4), 505–526 (2015)
Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Keates, S., Lebbon, C.: Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0001-0
Demirbilek, O., Demirkan, H.: Universal product design involving elderly users: a participatory’ design model. Appl. Ergon. 35(4), 361–370 (2004)
Olander, E.: Emotional principles for a holistic approach to Universal Design. Licentiate thesis. Division of Industrial Design, Department of Design Sciences, Lund University, Sweden (2007)
Olander, E.: Design as reflection. Dissertation. Division of Industrial Design, Department of Design Sciences, Lund University, Sweden (2011)
Akrich, M.: The description of technical objects. In: Bijker, W., Law, J. (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society, pp. 205–224. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)
Pinch, T.: Giving birth to new users: how the minimoog was sold to rock and roll. In: Oudshoorn, N., Pinch, T. (eds.) How Users Matter: The Co-construction of Users and Technology (Inside Technology), pp. 247–270. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)
Akrich, M.: User representations: practices, methods and sociology. In: Managing Technology in Society. The Approach of Constructive Technology Assessment, pp. 167–184. Pinter, London (1995)
Woolgar, S.: Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. In: Law, J. (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters. Routledge, Abingdon (1991)
Wilkie, A.: Prototyping as event: designing the future of obesity. J. Cult. Econ. 7, 476–492 (2013)
Hyysalo, S.: Representations of use and practice-bound imaginaries in automating the safety of the elderly. Soc. Stud. Sci. 36(4), 599–626 (2006)
Östlund, B.: The benefits of involving older people in the design process. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population-Design for Aging, pp. 3–14 (2015)
Peine, A., Rollwagen, I., Neven, L.: The rise of the “innosumer”—rethinking older technology users. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 82(2014), 199–214 (2014)
Oudshoorn, N., Pinch, T. (eds.): How Users Matter, The Co-construction of Users and Technology. Cambridge (2003)
European Commission: Blueprint Digital Transformation of Health and Care for the Ageing Society (2016). http://bit.ly/2j4gxCg
Östlund, B., Björling, G., Sahlström, M., Mattsson, J.: Digitizing health care in collaboration between nursing and engineering. Int. J. Adv. Life Sci. 10(1–2), 11–22 (2018)
Peine, A., Faulkner, A., Jaeger, B., Moors, E.: Science, technology and the grand challenge of ageing – understanding the socio-material constitution of later life. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 93, 1–9 (2015)
Merkel, S., Kucharski, A.: Participatory design in gerontechnology: a systematic literature review. Gerontologist 59, e16–e25 (2018)
Joshi, S.G., Bratteteig, T.: Designing for prolonged mastery. On involving old people in participatory design. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 28(1), 1–34 (2016)
Ayalon, L., Tesch-Römer, C. (eds.): Contemporary Perspectives on Ageism. IPA, vol. 19. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8
Kuijer, L., de Jong, A.: Practice theory and human centered design: a sustainable bathing example. Nordes (4), 607–619 (2011)
Rosales, A., Fernández-Ardèvol, M.: Structural ageism in big data approaches. Nordicom Rev. 40(s1), 51–64 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2019-0013
Chen, K., Chan, A.H.: Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics 57(5), 635–652 (2014)
Essén, A., Östlund, B.: Laggards as innovators? Old users as designers of new services & service systems. Int. J. Des. 5(3), 89–98 (2014)
Sixsmith, J., Lan Fang, M., Woolrych, R., Canham, S.L., Battersby, L., Sixsmith, A.: Ageing well in the right place: partnership working with older people. Work. People 21(1), 1–9 (2017)
Peine, A., Cooten, V., Neven, L.: Rejuvenating design: bikes, batteries, and older adopters in the diffusion of e-bikes. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 42(3), 429–459 (2017)
Fischer, B., Peine, A., Östlund, B.: The importance of user involvement: a systematic review of involving older users in technology design. Gerontologist (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz163
Jonsson, O.: Furniture for later life. Dissertation. Lund University, Department of Design Sciences, Industrial Design (2013)
Lindén, K., Östlund, B.: Turning old people’s experiences into innovations: IPPI, as the example of mobile services and TV viewing. Gerontechnology 10(2), 103–109 (2011)
Subasi, Ö., Malmborg, L., Fitzpatrick, G., Östlund, B.: Reframing design culture and aging. Interactions. ACM (2014). 1072-5520/2014/
Krueger, R.A., Casey, M.-A.: Focus Groups. A Practical guide for Applied Research. Sage Publications, London (2009)
Turkle, S.: Alone Together. Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books, New York (2011)
Graff, J.: Career as an experiential learning voyage. Development of experiential assessment methodology in a lifelong learning context. Dissertation. Umeå University, Umeå School of Business, Sweden (2008)
Frennert, S.: Older people meet robots. Three case studies on the domestication of robots in everyday life. Lund University. Faculty of Engineering, Department of Design Sciences, Doctoral dissertation (2016)
Katz, S., Calasanti, T.: Critical perspectives on successful aging: does it “appeal more than it illuminates”? Gerontologist 55(1), 26–33 (2015)
Haddon, L.: Roger Silverstone’s legacies: domestication. New Media Soc. 9(1), 25–32 (2007)
De la Hera, T., Loos, E.F., Simons, M., Blom, J.: Benefits and factors influencing the design of intergenerational digital games: a systematic literature review. Societies 7(3), 18 (2017)
Loos, E., de la Hera, T., Simons, M., Gevers, D.: Setting up and conducting the co-design of an intergenerational digital game: a state-of-the-art literature review. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) HCII 2019. LNCS, vol. 11592, pp. 56–69. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22012-9_5
Mannheim, I., et al.: Inclusion of older adults in the research and design of digital technology. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16(19), 3718 (2019)
Acknowledgements
The research project BConnect@Home – Making use of digital devices in later life (https://www.researchgate.net/project/) is funded by the JTP 2017 - JPI More Years, 12 Better Lives (Grant Agreement 363850), FORTE (ref. 2017-02301).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Östlund, B. et al. (2020). Using Academic Work Places to Involve Older People in the Design of Digital Applications. Presentation of a Methodological Framework to Advance Co-design in Later Life. In: Gao, Q., Zhou, J. (eds) Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Technologies, Design and User Experience. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12207. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50252-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50252-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50251-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50252-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)