Co-creating an Online TimeBank for Inclusive Research

  • Sarah Parsons
  • Andrew Power
  • Melanie Nind
  • Ken Meacham
  • Clare Hooper
  • Anne Collis
  • Mal Cansdale
  • Alan Armstrong
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9758)


Participatory and inclusive approaches to research have become more common as researchers recognize the benefits of enabling the meaningful involvement of representative community users in the development of accessible technologies. One of the major challenges in this context is how the involvement of community members can be appropriately supported in project-related activities: payment for time and contributions is a particularly difficult and longstanding issue. This paper discusses the inclusive development of an online Timebank involving community members with intellectual disabilities. The TimeBank is conceived as a tool that enables people to contribute their different expertise on the basis of time, rather than monetary reward. The development process of the TimeBank is described as well as the challenges faced by the research team. There is much potential in the Timebank idea, although considerable further research is needed to establish an accessible, usable, credible and trustworthy resource.


Participatory research User involvement Intellectual disabilities Equity Inclusion 



This project was funded by the WebScience Stimulus Fund at the University of Southampton, UK.


  1. 1.
    Abascal, J., Nicolle, C.: Moving towards inclusive design guidelines for socially and ethically aware HCI. Interact. Comput. 17(5), 484–505 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abbott, S., McConkey, R.: The barriers to social inclusion as perceived by people with intellectual disabilities. J. Intellect. Disabil. 10(3), 275–287 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson, D.: Research and empowerment: involving people with learning difficulties in oral and life history research. Disabil. Soc. 19(7), 691–702 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bleumers, L., All, A., Mariën, I., Schurmans, D., Van Looy, J., Jacobs, A., Willaert, K., de Grove, F.: State of play of digital games for empowerment and inclusion: a review of the literature and empirical cases. In: EUR 25652 Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union (2012). doi: 10.2791/36295
  5. 5.
    Bretherton, J., Pleace, N.: An Evaluation of the Broadway Skills Exchange Time Bank. Centre for Housing Policy, University of York (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cahn, E.: No More Throw-Away People: The Co-production Imperative. Essential Books, Washington, D.C. (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coleman, R., Clarkson, J., Dong, H., Cassim, J.: Design for Inclusivity: A Practical Guide to Accessible, Innovative and User-Centred Design. Gower Publishing Limited, Hampshire, UK (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cornwall, A., Jewkes, R.: What is participatory research? Soc. Sci. Med. 41(12), 1667–1676 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Druin, A.: The role of children in the design of new technology. Behav. Inf. Technol. 21(1), 1–25 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glynos, J., Speed, E.: Varieties of co-production in public services: time banks in a UK health policy context. Crit. Policy Stud. 6(4), 402–433 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hooper, C., Nind, M., Parsons, S.J., Power, A., Collis, A.: Building a social machine: co-designing a TimeBank for inclusive research. In: WebSci 2015, Oxford, UK, 28 June–01 July 2015. doi: 10.1145/2786451.2786472
  12. 12.
    Lewis, A., Parsons, S., Robertson, C., Feiler, A., Tarlton, B., Watson, D., Marvin, C.: The role and working of reference, or advisory, groups involving disabled people: reviewing the experiences and implications of three contrasting research projects. Br. J. Spec. Educ. 35(2), 78–84 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Manning, C.: ‘My memory’s back!’ Inclusive learning disability research using ethics, oral history and digital storytelling. Br. J. Learn. Disabil. 38(3), 160–167 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nind, M.: Participatory data analysis: a step too far? Qual. Res. 11(4), 349–363 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nind, M.: What is Inclusive Research?. Bloomsbury Academic, London (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nind, M., Armstrong, A., Cansdale, M., Collis, A., Hooper, C., Parsons, S., Power, A.: TimeBanking: Towards a co-produced solution for power and money issues in inclusive research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. (in press). doi: 10.1080/13645579.2016.1179469
  17. 17.
    Parsons, S., Cobb, S.: Who chooses what I need? Child voice and userinvolvement in the development of learning technologies for children with autism. In: EPSRC Observatory for Responsible Innovation in ICT. (2013). Accessed 22 Jan 2016
  18. 18.
    Parsons, S., Cobb, S.: Reflections on the role of the ‘users’: challenges in a multi-disciplinary context of learner-centred design for children on the autism spectrum. Int. J. Res. Method Educ. 37(4), 421–441 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seyfang, G.: Time banks: rewarding community self-help in the inner city. Commun. Dev. J. 39(1), 62–71 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Walmsley, J., Johnson, K.: Past, Present, and Futures. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah Parsons
    • 1
  • Andrew Power
    • 1
  • Melanie Nind
    • 1
  • Ken Meacham
    • 2
  • Clare Hooper
    • 2
  • Anne Collis
    • 3
  • Mal Cansdale
    • 3
  • Alan Armstrong
    • 3
  1. 1.University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.IT InnovationThe University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  3. 3.Barod, Community Interest CompanyBangorUK

Personalised recommendations