Designing Augmented, Domestic Environments to Support Ageing in Place

  • Jeannette DurickEmail author
  • Linda Leung
Part of the Cognitive Science and Technology book series (CSAT)


[S]tereotypes are useful for camouflaging the social arrangements which we impose upon the aged members of our society.


  1. 1.
    Ackerman MS, Starr B (1995) Social activity indicators: interface components for CSCW systems. In: Paper presented to the proceedings of the 8th annual ACM symposium on user interface and software technology, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Angelini L, Caon M, Carrino S, Bergeron L, Nyffeler N, Jean-Mairet M, Mugellini E (2013) Designing a desirable smart bracelet for older adults. In: International joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing (UbiComp’ 13), Zurich, Switzerland, pp 425–434Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Asquith N (2009) Positive ageing, neoliberalism and Australian sociology. J Soc 45(3):255–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bartlett H, Carroll M (2010) Capacity building in ageing research: key successes and challenges of the Australian experience. Gener Rev 20(4):1–4Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baskinger M (2007a) Autonomy + the aging population: designing empowerment into home appliances. In: Feijs L, Kyffin S, Young B (eds) DeSForM Design and semantics of form and movement, pp 133–146Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baskinger M (2007b) Experientializing home appliances to empower the aging population for autonomous living. In: Proceedings of the 2007 conference on designing for user eXperiences. ACM, p 14Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bekker T, Sturm J, Barakova E (2010) Design for social interaction through physical play in diverse contexts of use. Pers Ubiquit Comput 14(5):381–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blythe M, Monk A (2005) Net Neighbours: adapting HCI methods to cross the digital divide. Interact Comput 17(1):35–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Caine KE, Zimmerman CY, Schall-Zimmerman Z, Hazlewood WR, Camp LJ, Connelly KH, Huber LL, Shankar K (2011) DigiSwitch: a device to allow older adults to monitor and direct the collection and transmission of health information collected at home. J Med Syst, pp 1181–1195Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Caine KE, Zimmerman CY, Schall-Zimmerman Z, Hazlewood WR, Sulgrove AC, Camp LJ, Connelly KH, Huber LL, Shankar K (2010) DigiSwitch: design and evaluation of a device for older adults to preserve privacy while monitoring health at home. In: International health informatics (IHI ‘10). Arlington, Virginia, USA, pp 153–162Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheng Q, Juen J, Li Y, Prieto-Centurion V, Krishnan JA, Schatz BR (2013) GaitTrack: Health monitoring of body motion from spatio-temporal parameters of simple smartphones. In: Bioinformatics, computational biology and biomedical informaticsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cornejo R, Hernández D, Favela J, Tentori M, Ochoa S (2012) Persuading older adults to socialize and exercise through ambient games. In: 2012 6th International Conference on, Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (Pervasive Health), IEEE, pp 215–218Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cornejo R, Tentori M, Favela J (2013) Ambient awareness to strengthen the family social network of older adults. In: Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW), pp 1–36Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Croci V (2010) Relational interactive architecture. Archit Des 80(3):122–125Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Csikszentmihalyi M, Rochberg-Halton E (1981) The meaning of things: domestic symbols and the self. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davidson JL, Jensen C (2013) What health topics older adults want to track: a participatory design study. In: International conference on computers and accessibility (ASSETS ’13). Bellevue, WA, USA, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction, Kindle edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fernaeus Y, Tholander J, Jonsson M (2008) Beyond representations: towards an action-centric perspective on tangible interaction. Int J Arts Technol 1(3/4):249–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fox MA, Yeh BP (1999) Intelligent kinetic systems. Prep MANSEE 99Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fozard JL (2002) Gerontechnology—beyond ergonomics and universal design. Gerontechnol 1(3):137–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gaver WH, Hooker B, Dunne A, Farrington P (2001) The presence project. RCA Computer Related Design Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grosinger J, Vetere F, Fitzpatrick G (2012) Agile life: addressing knowledge and social motivations for active aging. In: Paper presented to the OZCHI’12, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harvey PW, Thurnwald I (2009) Ageing well, ageing productively: the essential contribution of Australia’s ageing population to the social and economic prosperity of the nation. Health Soc Rev 18(4):379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hazan H (1994) Old age: constructions and deconstruction, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hernández-Encuentra E, Pousada M, Gómez-Zúñiga B (2009) ICT and older people: beyond usability. Educ Gerontol 35(3):226–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Holl S (2010) Housing Complex, Fukuoka. In: Ebner P, Herrmann E, Höllbacher R, Kuntscher M, Wietzorrek U (eds) Typology +. Berhäuser Verlag AG, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Holtzblatt K, Beyer H (2014) Contextual design: evolved, Morgan & ClaypoolGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hornecker E, Buur J (2006) Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction. In: Paper presented to the proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Montréal, Québec, Canada, pp 22–27, April, 2006Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ishii H (2008a) Tangible bits: beyond pixels. In: Paper presented to the proceedings of the 2nd international conference on tangible and embedded interaction, Bonn, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ishii H (2008) The tangible user interface and its evolution. Commun ACM 51(6):32–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ishii H, Ullmer B (1997) Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 234–241Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jalaliniya S, Pederson T (2012) A wearable kid’s health monitoring system on smartphone.In: NordiCHI, pp 791–792Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kendig H, Browning C (2011) Directions for ageing well in a healthy Australia. Acad Soc Sci 31(2):23–30Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Khovanskaya V, Baumer EP, Cosley D, Voida S, Gay G (2013) Everybody knows what you’re doing: a critical design approach to personal informatics. In: CHI, pp 3403–3412Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lawson B (2001), The language of space, Architectural PressGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lawson S, Jamison-Powell S, Garbett A, Linehan C, Kucharczyk E, Verbaan S, Rowland DA, Morgan K (2013) Validating a mobile phone application for the everyday, unobtrusive, objective measurement of sleep. In: Paper presented to the proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leonardi C, Mennecozzi C, Not E, Pianesi F, Zancanaro M, Gennai F, Cristoforetti A (2009) Knocking on elders’ door: investigating the functional and emotional geography of their domestic space. In: Paper presented to the CHI 2009, Boston, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li I. Dey AK, Forlizzi J (2011) Understanding my data, myself: supporting self-reflection with ubicomp technologies. UbiComp, pp 405–414Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mäyrä F, Soronen A, Vadén T (2004) Future proactive homes: some design principles. NordiCHI, Tampere, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    National Health and Medical Research Council (2004) Ageing well, ageing productively, Commonwealth of Australia.
  41. 41.
    Negroponte N (2009) Being digital. Random House, ednGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Norman DA, Draper SW (1986) User-centred system design: new perspectives on HCI. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, Hillsdale, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Östlund B (2004) Social science research on technology and the elderly—does it exist? Sci Stud 17(2):44–62Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Östlund B (2005) Design paradigms and misunderstood technology: the case of older users. In: Östlund B (ed) Young technologies in old hands: an international view on senior citizens’ utilization of ICT. DJOF Publishing, Copenhagen, pp 25–39Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Östlund B (2008) The revival of research circles: meeting the needs of modern aging and the third age. Educ Gerontol 34(4):255–266CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pang CE, Neustaedter C, Riecke BE, Oduor E, Hillman S (2013) Technology preferences and routines for sharing health information during the treatment of a chronic illness. In: CHI, pp 1759–1768Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Parkes A, Poupyrev I, Ishii H (2008) Designing kinetic interactions for organic user interfaces. Commun ACM 51(6):58–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pedell S, Vetere F, Kulik L, Ozanne E, Gruner A (2010) Social isolation of older people: the role of domestic technologies. In: Paper presented to the OzCHI 2010 CHISIG, ACM, Brisbane, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Riche Y, Mackay W (2010) PeerCare: supporting awareness of rhythms and routines for better aging in place. Comput Supported Coop Work (CSCW) 19(1):73–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Robertson T, Durick J, Brereton M, Vaisutis K, Vetere F, Nansen B, Howard S (2013) Emerging technologies and the contextual and contingent experiences of ageing well. In: Kotzé P, Marsden G, Lindgaard G, Wesson J, Winckler M (eds) Human-computer interaction—INTERACT 2013, vol 8119. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 582–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Robertson T, Durick J, Brereton M, Vetere F, Howard S, Nansen B (2012) Knowing our users: scoping interviews in design research with ageing participants. In: Proceedings of the 24th Australian computer-human interaction conference, ACM, pp 517–520Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Romero N, Sturm J, Bekker T, de Valk L, Kruitwagen S (2010) Playful persuasion to support older adults’ social and physical activities. Interact Comput 22(6):485–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Schnädelbach H (2010) Adaptive architecture–a conceptual framework. In: Interaction of architecture, media and social phenomena, p 523Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sherbini K, Krawczyk R (2004) Overview of intelligent architecture. In: Paper presented to the 1st ASCAAD international conference, e-design in architecture, KFUPM, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, December, 2004Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sperry L, Prosen H (1996) Aging in the twenty-first century: a developmental perspective. Garland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Turkle S (ed) (2008) The inner history of devices. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vaisutis K, Brereton M, Robertson T, Vetere F, Durick J, Nansen B, Buys L (2014) Invisible connections: investigating older people’s emotions and social relations around objects. In: Paper presented to the CHI 2014, Toronto, CanandaGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wagner I (2011) Building urban narratives: collaborative site-seeing and envisioning in the MR tent. Comput Supported Coop Work (CSCW) 21(1):1–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Weiser M (1991) The computer for the 21st century. Sci Am 265(3):94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    World Health Organization (WHO) 2002 Active ageing: a policy framework, pp 1–59Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yeoh BSA, Huang S (2009) Foreign domestic workers and home-based care for elders in Singapore. J Aging Soc Policy 22(1):69–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia

Personalised recommendations