Teaching Design for All Through Empathic Modeling: A Case Study in Tallinn University

  • Vladimir Tomberg
  • Mart Laanpere
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8510)


The goal of the paper is to illustrate best practices that can be used in Design for All courses. We implemented the empathic modeling approach in HCI study programme by letting the students simulate users with disabilities in the physical settings in order to increase their understanding of Design for All in their work as HCI designers. The data was collected from students with online questionnaire and open reflections after the course.


Accessibility Design for All Empathy Empathic Modeling Teaching DfA 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    European Commission: Digital Agenda for Europe - European Commission,
  2. 2.
    Aegean, J.D., Rsehf, N.L.U., Romero, R., Engelen, J., Kulrd, S., Carlos, A., Verelst, T., Verbrugge, N., Miesenberger, K.: Teaching DfA Core Knowledge and Skill Sets: Experiences in including inclusive design (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campus, T.P., Road, B., Whitney, G., Keith, S.: Utilising Best Practice in ICT Design for All Teaching, pp. 1–18 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bohman, P.R.: Teaching Accessibility and Design-For-All in the Information and Communication Technology Curriculum: Three Case Studies of Universities in the United States, England, and Austria (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burzagli, L., Emiliani, P.L., Gabbanini, F.: Design for All in action: An example of analysis and implementation. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 985–994 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Livi-Bacci, M.: A concise history of world population. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haux, R., Howe, J., Marschollek, M., Plischke, M., Wolf, K.-H.: Health-enabling technologies for pervasive health care: on services and ICT architecture paradigms. Informatics Heal. Soc. Care 33, 77–89 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhavoronkov, A., Litovchenko, M.: Biomedical progress rates as new parameters for models of economic growth in developed countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10, 5936–5952 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Costa, R., Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Lima, L., Machado, J., Marques, A., Neves, J.: Ambient Assisted Living. In: 3rd Symposium of Ubiquitous Computing and Ambient Intelligence, pp. 86–94. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Ruyter, B., Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, E., Aarts, E.: Ambient Assisted Living Research in the CareLab. GeroPsych J. Gerontopsychology Geriatr. Psychiatry 23, 115–119 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Emiliani, P.L., Stephanidis, C.: From Adaptations to User Interfaces for All. In: 6th ERCIM Workshop CNR-IROE, Florence, Italy (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newell, A.F., Gregor, P.: “User Sensitive Inclusive Design” - in search of a new paradigm. In: Proceedings on the 2000 Conference on Universal Usability, pp. 39–44. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edwards, A.D.N.: Extra-ordinary human-computer interaction: interfaces for users with disabilities. CUP Archive (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kouprie, M., Visser, F.: A framework for empathy in design: stepping into and out of the user’s life. J. Eng. Des. (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Decety, J., Jackson, P.: The functional architecture of human empathy. Behav. Cogn. Neurosci.  (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reik, T.: Character analysis. Farrar, Strauss, Giroux, New York (1949)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Torrens, G.E.: Universal Design: Empathy and Affinity. In: Waldemar, K., Marcelo, M.S., Neville, A.S. (eds.) Human Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design. Methods and Techniques, pp. 233–248. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nicolle, C., Maguire, M.: Empathic Modelling in Teaching Design for All Empathic Modelling. Univers. Access HCI Incl. Des. Inf. Soc. 4, 143–147 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Joy, G.-D., Waller, S.D., John, C.P.: Simulating impairment. In: Proceedings of (re) Actor3, the Third International Conference on Digital Live Art, Liverpool, pp. 3–4 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Center for Universal Design: Universal Design Principles,
  22. 22.
    Erlandson, R.F.: Universal and accessible design for products, services, and processes. CRC Press (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lawrence, E.J., Shaw, P., Baker, D., Baron-Cohen, S., David, A.S.: Measuring empathy: reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient. Psychol. Med. 34, 911–924 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lietz, C., Gerdes, K., Sun, F., Mullins Geiger, J., Wagaman, M.A., Segal, E.: The Empathy Assessment Index (EAI): A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of a Multidimensional Model of Empathy. J. Soc. Social Work Res. 2, 104–124 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jolliffe, D., Farrington, D.P.: Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale. J. Adolesc. 29, 589–611 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir Tomberg
    • 1
  • Mart Laanpere
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of InformaticsTallinn UniversityEstonia

Personalised recommendations