Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bridging the gender and generation gap by ICT applying a participatory design process

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, we present an interdisciplinary research and design project on gender and diversity aspects in the development of information and communication technology (ICT). We take this project as a case study in order to show how we dealt with the digital divide. The digital divide denotes a knowledge and communication gap that finally leads to social disintegration caused by unequal ownership of information and communication technology (ICT) and unequally distributed access to the online world. It separates the society into so-called onliners and “none-liners”. The digital divide is caused by social factors like age, gender, education, and local infrastructure (Arnhold in Digital Divide. Zugangs-oder Wissenskluft? Verlag Reinhard Fischer, München, 2003; Gehrke in Digitale Teilung—Digitale Integration. Perspektiven der Internetnutzung. ecmc Working Paper, München, 2004; Initiative D21, TNS Infratest (ed) in (N)Onliner Altas 2010. Eine Topografie des digitalen Grabens durch Deutschland. Nutzung und Nichtnutzung des Internets, Strukturen und regionale Verteilung, 2010; Initiative D21, TNS Infratest (ed) in Die digitale Gesellschaft in Deutschland—Sechs Nutzertypen im Vergleich. Eine Sonderstudie im Rahmen des (No)Onliner Atlas 2010, 2010; Statistisches Bundesamt (ed) in Wirtschaftsrechnungen. Private Haushalte in der Informationsgesellschaft Nutzung von Informations und Kommunikationstechnologien, Wiesbaden, 2010; Statistisches Bundesamt (ed) in Informationsgesellschaft in Deutschland, Wiesbaden, 2009). In our case study, we particularly show how we dealt with the aspects of age and gender on a methodological and practical level. Finally, we present a design concept based on research results explicitly considering age- or female-induced ICT demands and preferences. With this concept, we show how we attempt to enhance social equality and inclusion based on distributed responsibilities within local social networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Figs. 9–14
Figs. 15–20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Results from representative surveys about the information society 2010 in Germany [3–5] prove that the digital divide expands with the increase of age, the decrement of the level of education in combination with being female: The ‘digital outsiders’ are averagely 64.9 years old, have a low level of education and are to 65% female [4, p. 12].

  2. In Germany, the elderly internet users are a very heterogeneous group: 71.8% of them aged between 50–59 years are internet users, which corresponds to the Germany-wide internet usage rate of 72%. In contrast to that, just 54% of people between 60 and 69 years and only 23.3% of people older than 70 years use the internet, although there are growth rates of 5.5% in the age segment between 60 and 69 years and of 4.4% for the segment older than 70 years in comparison to 2009 [3].

  3. Referring to the results of representative studies about the information society 2010 in Germany [3, 5], age indeed matters a lot in terms of the usage of ICT and the internet. 97.5% of the pupils are online, independent from their gender and level or status of education. 95.8% of the people between 14 to 29 years, 87.1% people between 30 to 49 years and 49.6% people aged 50 years and older were online in Germany in [3].

  4. Results from representative surveys indeed show that that the communication preferences differ with age: E-mail can be regarded as the most popular online communication channel which overarches generations: 73% of people aged 10–15 years old; 95% of people aged 16–24 years old, 93% of people aged 25–44 years old, 87% of people aged 45–64 years old, 87% of the people aged older than 65 years old use e-mail for private communication [5, p. 28]. Other online communication channels like social network sites, chats and instant messengers become more and more popular for young users: 68% of people aged between 10 to 15 years old, 89% of people aged between 16 to 24 years use these channels in comparison to 46% of people aged between 24 to 44 years, 20% of them between 25 to 44 years old and just 10% of them older than 65 years old [5, p. 28].

  5. The JIM study [49] differentiates between the frequency and the importance of teenage ICT and media use: While the mobile phone, internet and TV are most frequently used [49, p. 12], the teenagers evaluate listening to music as the most important media activity for them [49, p. 13]. Female teenagers possess more digital cameras than male teenagers (61% female owners vs. 41% male owners) which may be an indicator for their general interest in photography [49, p. 8]. Generally, e-entertainment decreases with the age of 25 years [5, p. 29].

  6. Referring to the JIM study the use of ICT and internet of teenagers between 12 and 19 years look like this in [49]: The mobile phone is definitely the core device for male as well as female teenagers, but also the internet is mainly used for communication: 46% of the teenagers communicate via social network sites, chats, e-mail or instant messengers, 25% use the internet for entertainment and 17% for online games. 75% of the girls and 66% of the boys use online communities daily or several times a week. [49, p. 41]. The most popular internet services for girls are online communities like “SchülerVZ”, “StudiVZ” and “facebook”, followed by instant messengers (ICQ, MSN) and e-mail [49, p. 32]. There is an interesting finding of another survey [5] in terms of online participation and contribution: Especially girls are active content providers: 36% of them between 10 to 15 years and 47% of young women between 16 to 24 years post and upload own texts, photos and videos in contrast to 26% of the boys and 43% of young men [5, p. 30].

  7. The mobile phone is more important for female (86%) than for male teenagers (75%) [49, p. 13]. Girls spend 54% of their online time for communication in online communities, chats or with e-mails, boys just spend 38% for similar activities [49, p. 29].

  8. This phenomenon is also confirmed by representative studies about the information society in Germany 2010 [3, 5, 6]. The gap between male and female online users as well as within one gender category increases seriously at the age of 50 years: Within the age range of 50 to 59 years, there are 64.6% women and 79.1% men online. Between 60 and 69 years, there are just 43.1% female online users in comparison to 65.8% male online users. At the age of 70 years and older, just 14.4% women in comparison to 36.6% men use the internet [3, p. 44].

  9. Although women over 70 years are very active and socially involved, they manage their lives without internet. According to our findings, the (N)Onliner study [3] also finds out that these women participate in internet services and use online offers indirectly via the support of relatives or friends.

  10. This is also confirmed by the representative studies [3, 5, 49] which show that nearly every pupil or teenager in Germany has a mobile phone, a computer and nearly daily access to the internet.

  11. Referring to the data of the “Statistisches Bundesamt” [5], there is no significant difference of the online communication frequency between female and male internet users [5, p. 26]. Moreover, the mobile phone is the core device for male as well as female teenage users. The internet is mainly used for communication: 46% of the teenagers used it for communication via social network sites, chats, e-mail or instant messengers, 25% for entertainment and 17% for online games. 75% of the girls and 66% of the boys use online communities daily or several times a week. [49, p. 41].

  12. There is a gender difference with regard to online activities of teenagers: While girls spend 54% of their online time for communication, boys just spend 38% for it. Boys spend four times more than girls for online games (28% vs. 6%)..

  13. E-entertainment (download of games, photos, movies or music) is averagely more important for young men, but it decreases with the age of 25 years independent from gender [5, pp. 29–30].

  14. There is a general male preference for downloading software which 47% of male online users do, versus 23% of female online users [5, p. 26] and playing or downloading games, photos, movies or music which 43% of males do in comparison to 32% of female online users [5, p. 26].

  15. This corresponds to the technical and online activities of male users: They are indeed much more practiced in the installation of devices and software, programming or compressing of files [5, 6], they download and purchase more computers, respectively video games and software (37% male vs. 16% female customers), electronic devices (41% male vs. 21% female customers) and computer equipment (33% male vs. 14% female customers) [5, p. 33].

References

  1. Arnhold K (2003) Digital divide. Zugangs- oder Wissenskluft? Verlag Reinhard Fischer, München

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gehrke G (2004) Digitale teilung—digitale integration. Perspektiven der Internetnutzung. ecmc Working Paper, vol. 5. München

  3. Initiative D21, TNS Infratest (ed) (2010) (N)Onliner Altas 2010. Eine Topografie des digitalen Grabens durch Deutschland. Nutzung und Nichtnutzung des Internets, Strukturen und regionale Verteilung, Juli 2010. Download: http://www.initiatived21.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/NONLINER2010.pdf

  4. Initiative D21, TNS Infratest (ed) (2010) Die digitale Gesellschaft in Deutschland—Sechs Nutzertypen im Vergleich. Eine Sonderstudie im Rahmen des (No)Onliner Atlas 2010. Download: http://www.initiatived21.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Digitale_Gesellschaft_2010.pdf

  5. Statistisches Bundesamt (ed) (2010) Wirtschaftsrechnungen. Private Haushalte in der Informationsgesellschaft Nutzung von Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien, (IKT)—Fachserie 15 Reihe 4—2010 Wiesbaden. Download: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Publikationen/Fachveroeffentlichungen/Informationsgesellschaft/PrivateHaushalte/PrivateHaushalteIKT2150400107004,property=file.pdf

  6. Statistisches Bundesamt (ed) Informationsgesellschaft in Deutschland. Ausgabe 2009. Wiesbaden, November 2009. Download: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Publikationen/Fachveroeffentlichungen/Informationsgesellschaft/Querschnitt/Informationsgesellschaft1030701099004,property=file.pdf

  7. Buxton B (2007) Sketching user experience. Getting the design right and the right design. San Francisco

  8. Raskin J (2001) Das intelligente Interface. Neue Ansätze für die Entwicklung interaktiver Benutzerschnittstellen. Addison-Wesley, München

  9. Cooper A, Reimann R (2003) About face 2.0: the essentials of interaction design. Wiley, Indianapolis

    Google Scholar 

  10. Moggridge B (2006) Designing interactions. MIT Press, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. Academic Press, Chestnut Hill

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Norman DA (2002) Design for everyday things. New edition, USA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bratteteig T (2002) Bridging gender issues to technology design. In: Floyd C et al (Hg.) Feminist challenges in the information age. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp 91–106

  14. Clegg S, Mayfield W (1999) Gendered by design in: design issues 15(3):3–16

  15. Oudshoorn N, Rommes E, Stienstra M (2004) Configuring the user a s everybody: gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. In: Science, technology and human values 29(1):30–63

  16. Rommes E (2000) Gendered user representations. In: Balka E, Smith R (Hg.) Women, work and computerization. Charting a course to the future. Kluwer Academic Pub, Dordrecht, pp 137–145

  17. Traut EM (2006) Encyclopedia of gender and information technology. Hershey, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Buchmüller S, Joost G (2009) Design for elderly people—a methodological case study about the development of a dect phone. In: Sapio B, Haddon L, Mante-Meijer E, Fortunati L, Turk T, Loos E (eds) The good, the bad and the challenging: the user and the future of information and communication technologies, conference proceedings of the cost conference 298, 13th–15th May, Vol II, ABS-Center, d.o.o. Koper, Slovenia 2009, pp 710–719

  19. Herbert L (2007) GfK-Forscher zum Konsumverhalten von Senioren (Researcher from the German Organisation for Consumer Research writing on the Behaviour of Senior Consumers)—WDR.de—Wirtschaft, 30.03.2007, p 1 (in German)

  20. Robert S (2006) Zielgruppenanalyse und Produktadaption im Wachstumsmark “Alter” (“Target Group and Product Analysis of the ‘Older’ Growth Market”), FH München, Fachbereich Wirtschaftsingenieurswesen, July 2006, p 36 (in German)

  21. “Generation 55+, Chancen für Handel und Konsumgüterindustrie” (Generation 55+, Chances for Trade and the Consumer Industry), PricewaterhouseCoopers and University of St. Gallen Switzerland, January 2006, p 21 (original in German)

  22. European Commission (2006) (ed) Women in science and technology—the business perspective. Download: http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/pdf/wist_report_final_en.pdf (retrieved March 10, 2010)

  23. BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) (2008) (ed) Bildungsbericht Forschung und Innovation 2008. Berlin. Download unter: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/bufi_2008.pdf (retrieved March 10, 2010)

  24. Cox TH, Blake S (1991) Managing cultural diversity. Implications for organizational competiveness. In: Academy of management executive, 5(3):45–56

  25. Rastetter D (2006) Managing diversity in teams. Erkenntnisse aus der Gruppenforschung. In: Krell G, Wächter H (eds) Diversity management. Impulse aus der Personalforschung. München, Mehring, pp 81–108

  26. Akrich M (1995) User representations: practices, methods and sociology. In: Rip A, Misa TJET, Schot J (eds) Managing technology in society. The approach of constructive technology assessment, pp 167–184

  27. Bredies K, Buchmüller S, Joost G (2008) The gender perspective in cultural probes, participatory design conference, 1.10—4.10.08, Indiana University, Bloomington

  28. Brandes U (2001) Designing gender: das drama der Geschlechter in Logo-Gestaltungen. In: Zurstiege, Guido, Schmidt, Siegfried J (Hrsg.) Werbung, Mode, Design, Wiesbaden, pp 197–212

  29. Brandes U, Stich S (2004) Objektkörper—Körperobjekt. Mobiltelefone im interkulturellen Vergleich. In: Fachhochschule Köln (Hrsg.) Insider—Hauszeitschrift der FH Köln, Titelthema: Interkulturelle Kompetenz, Köln, S. 24–25 unter: http://www.verwaltung.fh-koeln.de/imperia/md/content/verwaltung/dezernat5/insider/insider1_2004.pdf

  30. Buchmüller S, Joost G, Chow R (2009) The role of interface in virtual gender presentations. In: Online proceedings of the 5th European symposium on gender & ICT, digital cultures: participation, empowerment, diversity, Bremen, Germany, 5th to 7th March 2009, http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/soteg/gict2009/proceedings/GICT2009_Buchmueller.pdf

  31. Buchmüller S (2008) Gendered by design. Zur kulturellen Konstruktion von Geschlecht durch Design in: Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaft und Kunst (HAWK) and Joost G (Hrsg.): Gender and Design, Maria-Goeppert-Mayer Programm, Hildesheim, pp 10–19

  32. Buchmüller S, Joost G (2009) Der Schein bestimmt das Sein. Zum Verschleierungsmechanismus der kulturellen Gestaltung von Geschlecht. In: Stein EK, Walzel F (Hrsg.) Oberflächen/Untersichten, Neuwerk, Zeitschrift für Designwissenschaft, eine Publikation der Schriftenreihe der Burg Giebichenstein, Hochschule für Kunst und Design Halle, pp 73–84

  33. Kirkham P (Hrsg.) (1996) The gendered object. Manchester University Press

  34. Ehrnberger K (2007) Materializing gender, design inquiries 2007. Interactive Institute Stockholm, Schweden

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zentrum Frau in Beruf und Technik (Hrsg.) (2006) Gender and design, castrop-rauxel unter: http://www.zfbt.de/veroeffentlichungen/dokumente/gender_design_2.81%20Leitfragen%20final.pdf

  36. Stein S, Bessing N (2009) Gender and diversity in innovation processes. In: VDI (ed) Gender and diversity in engineering and science. 1st European conference. Report 39. Düsseldorf, pp 95–110

  37. Gaver W, Boucher A, Pennington S, Walker B (2004) Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions, Sep–Oct 04, pp 53–56

  38. Gaver W, Dunne T, Pacenti T (1999) Cultural probes. ACM, pp 21–29

  39. Graham C, Rouncefield C, Gibbs M, Vetere F, Cheverst K (2007) How probes work, OzCHI 07, pp 29–34

  40. Boehner K, Vertesi J, Sengers P, Dourish P (2007) How HCI interprets the probes. In: CHI proceedings 07, pp 1077–1986

  41. Lucero A, Lashina T, Diederiks E, Mattelmäki T (2007) How probes inform and influence the design process. ACM, pp 377–391

  42. Sanders E, Stappers PJ (2008) Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. In: CoDesign, Taylor & Francis http://www.maketools.com/pdfs/CoCreation_Sanders_Stappers_08_preprint.pdf

  43. Sanders E, William CT (2001) Harnessing people’s creativity: ideation and expression through visual communication. In: McDonagh P (ed) Focus groups: supporting effective product development, Taylor and Francis

  44. Sanders E (2002) From user-centered to participatory design approaches. In: Frascara J (ed) Design and the social sciences. Taylor and Francis

  45. Sanders E (1999) Postdesign and participatory culture. In: Userful and critical: the position of research in design. University of Art and Design Helsinki (UIAH), Tuusula

  46. Stappers PJ (2009) Meta-levels in design research: clarifying the roles we play in design, research, and elsewhere. In: Conference proceedings IASDR 09

  47. Redström J (2008) RE: Definitions of use. Design Stud 29(4):410–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Redström J (2006) Towards user design? On the shift from object to user as the subject of design. Design Stud 27(2):123–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (ed) JIM-Studie 2010. Jugend, Information, (Multi-)Media. Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 12 bis 19-Jähriger. Download: http://www.mpfs.de/fileadmin/JIM-pdf10/JIM2010.pdf

  50. Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (ed) JIMplus—Nahaufnahmen 2009. Einstellungen und Hintergründe zum Medienumgang der 12-bis 19-Jährigen. Qualitative Zusatzbefragung zur JIM-Studie 2009, August 2010. Download: http://www.mpfs.de/fileadmin/JIMplus/Nahaufnahmen/JIMplusNahaufnahmen2009Print.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Myriel Milicevic and Julia Werner from IxDS—Interaction Design Studios for their valuable contributions to the overall project and to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deutsche Telekom AG, Laboratories, Ernst-Reuter Platz 7, 10587, Berlin, Germany

    Sandra Buchmüller & Gesche Joost

  2. EAF, Berlin, Schumannstraße 5, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Nina Bessing & Stephanie Stein

Authors
  1. Sandra Buchmüller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gesche Joost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nina Bessing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie Stein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandra Buchmüller.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Buchmüller, S., Joost, G., Bessing, N. et al. Bridging the gender and generation gap by ICT applying a participatory design process. Pers Ubiquit Comput 15, 743–758 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0388-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0388-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation