Applying Design Methods to Promote Older Adults’ Walking Activities Based on Their Hobbies and Personal Interests

  • Marjolein C. den HaanEmail author
  • Rens G. A. Brankaert
  • Yuan Lu
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 167)


People identify with their hobbies often which stimulate physical activity and participation in social activities, which in turn relate to higher levels of subjective well-being. Hobbies are potentially a powerful tool for design; however, it is unclear how to take hobbies into the design process for example to increase engagement. By creating and using the Leisure Time Canvas we identified older adults’ previous, current and potential future hobbies, and by closely collaborating with users we process these results into the design of a walking application called Ommetje. Thus, we demonstrate a design case to motivate physical activity. We present the design rationale of Ommetje and how we evaluated this smartphone walking application with 16 older adults for four months, and reflect on the design process of using hobbies as an ingredient for design. We show the power of hobbies in a design (process) as an intrinsic motivation to trigger people to be more socially and physically active.


Design Older adults Hobbies and personal interests Leisure time Personalized technology 


  1. 1.
    Aldrich, N.: CDC Targets sedentary older adults. Aging Today 25(1), 7–8 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Azevedo, F.S.: The tailored practice of hobbies and its implication for the design of interest-driven learning environments the tailored practice of hobbies and its implication for the design of interest-driven learning environments, 8406 (2013).
  3. 3.
    Barnett, David W., Barnett, Anthony, Nathan, Andrea, Van Cauwenberg, Jelle, Cerin, Ester: Built environmental correlates of older adults’ total physical activity and walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Activity 14, 103 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barrett, Julia, Kirk, Stuart: Running focus groups with elderly and disabled elderly participants. Appl. Ergon. 31(6), 621–629 (2000). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun, Virginia, Clarke, Victoria: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burrows, A., Mitchell, V., Nicolle, C.: Cultural probes and levels of creativity. MobileHCI, pp. 920–23 (2015).
  7. 7.
    Cabrita, M., Nassabi, M.H., Op den Akker, H., Tabak, M., Hermens, H., Vollenbroek, M.: An unobtrusive system to monitor physical functioning of the older adults: results of a pilot study. In International Workshop on Personalization and Adaptation in Technology for Health 2015 (PATH 2015) Held in Conjunction with the 23rd Conference on User Modelling, Adaptation and Personalisation (UMAP 2015) (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    CBS: Increasing number of elderly using social media (2017).
  9. 9.
    Cedervall, Y., Torres, S., Åberg, A.C.: Maintaining well-being and selfhood through physical activity : experiences of people with mild alzheimer’ s disease. Aging Mental Health 19(8), 679–688. Taylor & Francis.
  10. 10.
    Chapman, B.P, Hampson, S., Clarkin, J.: Personality-informed interventions for healthy aging: conclusions from a national institute on aging workgroup. 50(5), 1426–1441 (2014).
  11. 11.
    Cohen-Mansfield, Jiska, Parpura-Gill, Aleksandra, Golander, Hava: Utilization of self-identity roles for designing interventions for persons with dementia. J. Gerontol. 61B(4), 202–212 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    den Haan, M., Brankaert, R., Lu, Y.: What moves you? designing a walking app for and with older adults. In Design4Health (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foster, L., Walker, A.: Active and successful aging: a european policy perspective. Gerontologist 55(1), 83–90 (2015). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaver, B., Dunne, T., Pacenti, E.: Design: cultural probes. Interactions 6(1), 21–29 (ACM) (1999).
  15. 15.
    Gregor, P., Newell, A., Zajicek, M.: Designing for dynamic diversity—interfaces for older people. In Proceedings of the Fifth International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies—Assets ’02 (2002).
  16. 16.
    Harlow, R.E., Cantor, N.: Still participating after all these years: a study of life task participation in later life. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 1235–1249 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haworth, J.T., Hill, S.: Work, leisure, and psychological well-being in a sample of young adults. J. Commun. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2, 147–160 (1992). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huang, C., Lee, L., Chang, M.: The influences of personality and motivation on exercise participation and quality of life. Soc. Behav. Personality 35, 1189–1210 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ireland, C.: Qualitative methods: from boring to brilliant. In: Laurel, B. (ed.) Design Research: Methods and Perspectives, pp. 23–29 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kahlbaugh, Patricia, Huffman, Loreen: Personality, emotional qualities of leisure, and subjective well-being in the elderly. Int. J. Aging Human Dev. 85(2), 164–184 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Katz, S.: Busy bodies: activity, aging, and the management of everyday life. J. Aging Stud. 14(2), 135–152 (2000). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Knight, T., Ricciardelli, L.A.: Successful aging: perceptions of adults aged between 70 and 101 years. Int. J. Ageing Human Dev. 56(3), 223–245 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kouprie, M., Visser, F.S.: A framework for empathy in design: stepping into and out of the user’s life. 20(5), 437–448 (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kujala, S.: User involvement: a review of the benefits and challenges. Behav. Inf. Technol. 22(1), 1–16 (2003). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lazar, A., Nguyen, D.H.: Successful leisure in independent living communities: understanding older adults’ motivations to engage in leisure activities (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lerouge, C., Ma, J., Sneha, S., Tolle, K.: User profiles and personas in the design and development of consumer health technologies. Int. J. Med. Inf. 82(11), e251–268. Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
  27. 27.
    Lockett, D., Willis, A., Edwards, N.: Through seniors’ eyes: an exploratory qualitative study to identify environmental barriers to and facilitators of walking. Canad. J. Nurs. Res. 37(3), 48–65 (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ory, M.G., Lee, S., Han, G., Towne, S.D., Quinn, C., Neher, T., Stevens, A., Smith, M.L.: Effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention on social support, self-efficacy, and physical activity among older adults : evaluation of texercise select. Int. J. Environ. Res. Pub. Health 15(234)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Righi, V., Sayago, S., Blat, J.: When we talk about older people in HCI, who are we talking about? towards a ‘turn to community’ in the design of technologies for a growing ageing population. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 108, 15–31 (2017). Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roozen, H., Wiersema, H., Strietman, M., Feij, J., Lewinsohn, P., Meyers, R., Koks, M., Vingerhoets, A.: Development and psychometric evaluation of the pleasant activities list. Am. J. Addict. 17(5), 422–435 (2008). Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rousseau, F.L., Vallerand, R.J.: An examination of the relationship between passion and subjective well-being in older adults. Int. J. Aging Human Dev. 66(3), 195–211 (2008). Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sanders: From user-centered to participatory design approaches. Des. Soc. Sci., vol. 7 (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sanders, E.B.N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4(1), 5–18 (2008).
  34. 34.
    Searle, M.S., Mahon, M.J., Iso-Ahola, S.E., Sdrolias, H.A., van Dyck, J.: Enhancing a sense of independence and psychological well-being among the elderly: a field experiment. J. Leisure Res. 27, 107–124 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Smith, G.L., Banting, L., Eime, R., O’Sullivan, G., Van Uffelen, G.J.: The association between social support and physical activity in older adults : a systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Activity 14(56), 1–21 (2017)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stappers, P.J., Sleeswijk Visser, F., Keller, I.: Mapping the experiential context of product use: generative techniques beyond questions and observations (2017). Accessed 14 Mar 2017.
  37. 37.
    Stebbins, R.A.: Amateurs, professionals, and serious leisure. McGill–Queen’s University Press, Montreal (1992)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Stebbins, R.A.: New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure. Mellen Stud. Sociol. vol. 28. Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, NY (2001)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Steen, M., Kuijt-Evers, L., Klok, J.: Early user involvement in research and design projects–a review of methods and practices. In: Paper for the 23rd EGOS Colloquium, pp. 1–21 (2007).
  40. 40.
    Takahashi, M., Kawasaki, H., Maeda, A., Nakamura, M.: Mobile walking game and group-walking program to enhance going out for older adults. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing Adjunct (2016)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Visser, F.S., Stappers, P.J., van der Lugt, R., Sanders, E.B.N.: Contextmapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign 1(2), 119–149 (2005). Scholar
  42. 42.
    Warr, P., Butcher, V., Robertson, I.: Activity and psychological well-being in older people. Aging Mental 8, 172–183 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zimmer, Z., Hickey, T., Searle, M.S.: Activity participation and well-being among older people with Arthritis. Gerontol. 35, 463–471 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marjolein C. den Haan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rens G. A. Brankaert
    • 1
  • Yuan Lu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial DesignUniversity of Technology EindhovenEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations