Advertisement

The Development of a Feature Matrix for the Design of Assistive Technology Products for Young Older People

  • Andree WoodcockEmail author
  • Jane Osmond
  • Nikki Holliday
Chapter
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 167)

Abstract

This chapter describes findings from the COnsumer MODels for Assisted Living (COMODAL) project, which aimed to develop a consumer market for Assistive Technology Products (ATPs) for Young Older People (YOPs: 50–70-year olds). The project used mixed methods to explore various aspects of the ATP consumer market, together with a feature matrix for the design of ATPs, guidance on user needs and expectations from an ATP consumer market, and suggested business models. The methodologies used included literature and product reviews, market analyses, interviews, focus groups, and co-creation workshops. The triangulated findings found that currently there are significantly high rates of non-use and abandonment of ATPs, due to numerous factors including poor aesthetic appeal and ease of use, stigma, and concerns about loss of face to face care. YOPs have an appetite for the use (and private purchase) of products and services to support their independence and health, but such products must focus on the whole person and their higher-level needs, wishes and aspirations, not just a particular disability—something which the product analysis found lacking in many existing products. One of the ways the project addressed this was through the development of a product matrix to support designers and businesses to more widely consider the evolving needs of YOPs with regards ATPs. The business models provided further guidance on the implementation of such products into the consumer market. The results will be of use to businesses wishing to grow or diversify into the ATP consumer market—a key opportunity at a time when publicly funded provision of such technologies is decreasing. Ultimately, ATPs must not only assist independent living, but should also support enhanced quality of life whilst meeting higher level needs and desires.

Keywords

Assistive technology Ergonomics Design Young older adults Design requirements 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This chapter describes findings from the Consumer MODels for Assisted Living project, led by Coventry University in partnership with AgeUK and Grandparents Plus, as part of the Assisted Living Innovation Platform and funded by the Technology Strategy Board (now Innovate UK).

References

  1. 1.
    Baltes, P.B., Baltes, M.M. (eds.): Successful aging: perspectives from the behavioural sciences. University Press, Cambridge, MA (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blythe, M.A., Monk, A.F., Doughty, K.: Socially dependable design: the challenge of ageing populations for HCI. Interact. Comput. 17, 672–689 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CEN 2003 [internet] CEN workshop agreement CWA 14661. Guidelines to standardisers of ICT products and services in the CEN ICT domain (cited 2010 Aug 12). Available from ftp://cenftp1.cenorm.be/PUBLIC/CWAs/e-Europe/DFA/cwa14661-00-2003-Feb.pdf
  4. 4.
    Coughlin, J.F., D’Ambrosio, L.A., Reimer, B., Pratt, M.R. (eds.): Engineering in Medicine and Biology Annual Conference. ‘Older Adult’s Perceptions of Smart Home Technologies: Implications for Research, Policy and Market Innovation in Healthcare’, August 2007, Lyon, France. Online available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18002331 (2007). IEEE
  5. 5.
    Damodaran, L., Olphert, W.: User responses to assisted living technologies (ALTs)—a review of the literature. J. Integr. Care 18(2), 25–32 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Commission, European: Active ageing and independent living services: the role of information and communication technology. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hekkert, P.: Design aesthetics: principles of pleasure in design. Psychol. Sci. 48(2), 157–172 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hersh, M.A., Johnson, M.A.: On modelling assistive technology systems part 1: modelling framework. Technol. Disability 20(3), 193–215 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hersh, M.A.: The design and evaluation of assistive technology products and devices part 1: design. International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation, Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE) (2010) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hersh, M.A.: The design and evaluation of assistive technology products and devices part 1: design. Available [online] from http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/309/ (2011)
  11. 11.
    Holliday, N., Ward, G., Fielden, S.: Understanding younger older consumers’ needs in a changing healthcare market—supporting and developing the consumer market for electronic assisted living technologies. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 39, 305–315 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jordan, P.W.: Displeasure and how to avoid it. In: Robertson, S. (ed.) Contemporary ergonomics. Taylor and Francis, London (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jordan, P.: Human factors for pleasure in product use. Appl. Ergon. 29(1), 25–33 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    King’s Fund: Consultation meeting on assistive technology. FAST, London (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kings’s Fund: Key challenges facing the adult social care sector in England. Kings Fund, London (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maslow, A.H.: Motivation and personality. Harper and Row, New York (1954)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rowe, J.H., Kahn, R.L.: Successful aging. Dell, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sanders, E., Stappers, P.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4(1), 5–18 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steel, D.M., Gray, M.A.: Baby boomers’ use and perception of recommended assistive technology: a systematic review. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 4(3), 129–136 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ward, G., Fielden, S., Muir, H., Holliday, N., Urwin, G.: Developing the assistive technology consumer market for people aged 50–70. Ageing Soc. 35(5), 1050–1067 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ward, G., Holliday, N., Awang, D., Harson, D.: Creative approaches to service design: using co-creation to develop a consumer-focused assistive technology service. Technol. Disability 27, 5–15 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ward, G., Holliday, N., Prothero, L., Woodcock, A.: COMODAL literature review. Available on request from authors (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ward, G., Holliday, N., Woodcock, A., Prothero, L.: Consumer MODels for assisted living (COMODAL)—work package 1: understanding users and the barriers and enablers to ALT. Available on request from authors (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ward, G., Ray, S.: Unlocking the potential of the younger older consumer: consumer preferences and the assisted living market. Available [online] at www.comodal.co.uk (2014)
  25. 25.
    Woodcock, A., Ward, G., Ray, S., Unwin, G., Osmond, J., Fielden, S.: Younger older consumers of assistive technology products. In: Contemporary Ergonomics (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Arts, Memory and Communities, Faculty of Arts and HumanitiesCoventry UniversityCoventryUK
  2. 2.Faculty of Health and Life SciencesCoventry UniversityCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations