Wickedness in Design of e-Health Systems for People Diagnosed with Schizophrenia

  • Susanne Lindberg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 294)


With the digitisation of society, e-health systems support new contexts that are different from traditional Information Systems contexts, and therefore need to be better understood. In design for complex, new and sensitive contexts, it is not possible to apply known methods and solutions without deeper contextual understanding. The paper intends to answer how the wickedness of the design context when designing digital services for people diagnosed with schizophrenia can be understood – a context that is contradictory and complex, that is, a wicked design context. The paper presents a grounded theory analysis of stakeholder interviews and focus group interviews with people diagnosed with schizophrenia. Four wicked problems are identified: struggle of dependence, contradiction of social interaction, contradiction of trust and counteracting improvement behaviour. The paper also shows the viability of the use of grounded theory for uncovering and describing contextual wickedness.


e-Health Wicked problems Wickedness Schizophrenia Grounded theory Design 



I would like to thank Henrika Jormfeldt and Magnus Bergquist for their contributions to the presented research. I would also like to thank the reviewers and all colleagues who have taken the time to comment on the paper. Last, but not least, I would like to thank the participants for their invaluable input, and for giving their time and energy to help.


  1. 1.
    Iivari, J., Isomäki, H., Pekkola, S.: The user—the great unknown of systems development: reasons, forms, challenges, experiences and intellectual contributions of user involvement. Inf. Syst. J. 20, 109–117 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tokar, O., Batoroev, K.: Identifying opportunities for future design research for mHealth for mental health. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2016, pp. Paper 65 (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aardoom, J.J., Dingemans, A.E., Van Furth, E.F.: E-health interventions for eating disorders: emerging findings, issues, and opportunities. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 18, 1–8 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kowatsch, T., Maass, W., Pletikosa Cvijikj, I., Büchter, D., Brogle, B., Dintheer, A., Wiegand, D., Durrer-Schutz, D., Xu, R., Schutz, Y.: Design of a health information system enhancing the performance of obesity expert and children teams. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MISQ 28, 75–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arias, E., Eden, H., Fischer, G., Gorman, A., Scharff, E.: Transcending the individual human mind—creating shared understanding through collaborative design. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 7, 84–113 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MISQ 37, 337–356 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mueser, K.T., McGurk, S.R.: Schizophrenia. Lancet 363, 2063–2072 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frangou, S.: Schizophrenia. Medicine 36, 405–409 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Andreasen, N.C.: Schizophrenia: the fundamental questions. Brain Res. Rev. 31, 106–112 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schuldberg, D.: Six subclinical spectrum traits in normal creativity. Creat. Res. J. 13, 5–16 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Couture, S.M., Penn, D.L., Roberts, D.L.: The functional significance of social cognition in schizophrenia: a review. Schizophr. Bull. 32, S44–S63 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davidson, L., Shahar, G., Stayner, D.A., Chinman, M.J., Rakfeldt, J., Tebes, J.K.: Supported socialization for people with psychiatric disabilities: lessons from a randomized controlled trial. J. Commun. Psychol. 32, 453–477 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Campellone, T.R., Caponigro, J.M., Kring, A.M.: The power to resist: the relationship between power, stigma, and negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 215, 280–285 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rittel, H.W., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4, 155–169 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., Evenson, S.: Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In: Proceedings of CHI, pp. 493–502. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilder-Willis, K.E., Shear, P.K., Steffen, J.J., Borkin, J.: The relationship between cognitive dysfunction and coping abilities in schizophrenia. Schizophr. Res. 55, 259–267 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Castelein, S., Bruggeman, R., Davidson, L., van der Gaag, M.: Creating a supportive environment: peer support groups for psychotic disorders. Schizophr. Bull. 41, 1211–1213 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davidson, L., Chinman, M., Kloos, B., Weingarten, R., Stayner, D., Tebes, J.K.: Peer support among individuals with severe mental illness: a review of the evidence. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 6, 165–187 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lloyd-Evans, B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Harrison, B., Istead, H., Brown, E., Pilling, S., Johnson, S., Kendall, T.: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of peer support for people with severe mental illness. BMC Psychiatry 14, 1 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Castelein, S., Bruggeman, R., Van Busschbach, J.T., Van Der Gaag, M., Stant, A., Knegtering, H., Wiersma, D.: The effectiveness of peer support groups in psychosis: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 118, 64–72 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chinman, M., George, P., Dougherty, R.H., Daniels, A.S., Ghose, S.S., Swift, A., Delphin-Rittmon, M.E.: Peer support services for individuals with serious mental illnesses: assessing the evidence. Psychiatr. Serv. 65, 429–441 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Naslund, J.A., Grande, S.W., Aschbrenner, K.A., Elwyn, G.: Naturally occurring peer support through social media: the experiences of individuals with severe mental illness using YouTube. PLoS ONE 9, e110171 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gowen, K., Deschaine, M., Gruttadara, D., Markey, D.: Young adults with mental health conditions and social networking websites: seeking tools to build community. Psychiatr. Rehabil. J. 35, 245 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Farrell, R., Hooker, C.: Design, science and wicked problems. Des. Stud. 34, 681–705 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nelson, H.G., Stolterman, E.: The Design Way: Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World: Foundations and Fundamentals of Design Competence. Educational Technology, Englewood Cliffs (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Buchanan, R.: Wicked problems in design thinking. Des. Issues 8, 5–21 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hawryszkiewycz, I.: Visualizations for addressing wicked problems using design thinking. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Information Systems 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alvesson, M., Kärreman, D.: Constructing mystery: empirical matters in theory development. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32, 1265–1281 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hong, W., Chan, F.K., Thong, J.Y., Chasalow, L.C., Dhillon, G.: A framework and guidelines for context-specific theorizing in information systems research. Inf. Syst. Res. 25, 111–136 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Charmaz, K.: Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative research. Sage Publications Ltd, London (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: Discovery of grounded theory. Sociology Press, Mill Valley (1967)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gregory, R.: Design science research and the grounded theory method: characteristics, differences, and complementary uses. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2010, pp. Paper 44 (2010)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hughes, J., Jones, S.: Reflections on the use of grounded theory in interpretive information systems research. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2003, pp. Paper 62 (2003)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Urquhart, C., Fernandez, W.: Grounded theory method: the researcher as blank slate and other myths. In: Proceedings of ICIS 2006, pp. Paper 31 (2006)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Urquhart, C.: An encounter with grounded theory: tackling the practical and philosophical issues. In: Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and Trends, pp. 104–140 (2000)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Melling, B., Houguet-Pincham, T.: Online peer support for individuals with depression: A summary of current research and future considerations. Psychiatr. Rehabil. J. 34, 252 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Webb, M., Burns, J., Collin, P.: Providing online support for young people with mental health difficulties: challenges and opportunities explored. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2, 108–113 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lederman, R., Wadley, G., Gleeson, J., Alvarez-Jimenez, M.: Using on-line technologies to identify and track early warning signs of psychosis. In: Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Information Systems—Research in Progress, pp. Paper 1 (2013)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Goldkuhl, G.: Design theories in information systems—a need for multi-grounding. J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. 6, 59 (2004)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Myers, M.D.: Qualitative research in information systems. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q 21, 241–242 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Liamputtong, P.: Researching the vulnerable: a guide to sensitive research methods. Sage, London (2006)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Usher, K., Holmes, C.: Ethical aspects of phenomenological research with mentally ill people. Nurs. Ethics 4, 49–56 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Högskolan i HalmstadHalmstadSweden

Personalised recommendations