A presentation from the first two(-ish) months of my PhD at the University of Sheffield. I had fifteen minutes to present this.

1. What makes an assistive
technology in the home invaluable
or alternatively abandoned?
Mark Hawker1, Dr. Bridgette Wessels1 and Prof. Gail Mountain2
1 Department of Sociological Studies
2 School of Health and Related Research

2. 2
Contents
• Who am I?
• What is my PhD about?
• Where will I focus?
• How will I do it?
• Why is this important?
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

3. 3
Who am I?
• BSc (Hons) Informatics from the University of Leeds with
an interest in personalisation and user-adaptive systems
• Teaching Development Fellow at the University of Leeds
• PGCert Health Research
• Author of “The Developer’s Guide to Social Programming”
• MA Social Research from the University of York
• I like blogging, too:
http://sociologicialsoliloquies.tumblr.com/
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

4. 4
What is my PhD about?
Ways in which assistive
technologies are:
• Introduced
(appropriation)
• Learned, displayed
and used
(objectification)
• Accepted or rejected
and talked about
(incorporation/
conversion)
… by users in their
homes and everyday
lives (domestication).
http://homeey.com/inspiration-design-with-real-tree-house-furniture-for-cats/
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

5. 5
Research Objectives
• To visualise the spaces in which an assistive technology
needs to be fitted into existing structures and furnishings
• To explore the social relations of the older person or
disabled person
• To identify the specific daily routines of health care
including considering how people cope with new
assistive technologies and routines
• To explore how people learn to personalise their
assistive technology.
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

6. 6
Assistive Technology Scope
• Community alarms • Movement detectors
• Video-monitoring • Dawn/dusk lights
• Health monitors • Smoke alarms
• Fall detectors • Fire alarms
• Hip protectors • Cooker controls
• Pressure mats • Electronic calendars/
• Door alerts speaking clocks
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

7. 7
(Assistive) Technology as Metaphor
• Black box
• Machine, organism, information processing brain
• Evolutionary
• Seamless web, actor-network, socio-technical
ensemble, text
• Embodied interests, crystallised contingency
• Wild animal.
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

8. 8
The “Ideal” Scenario
Assistive technologies go from being
“cold, lifeless, problematic and
challenging [consumer] goods” to
“comfortable, useful tools … that are
reliable and trustworthy”.
(Berker et al., 2006: 2)
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

9. 9
The Social-Technical “Challenge”
• Social activity is fluid, nuanced and situated
(Suchman, 1987).
• Social groups not only adapt to their technologies
but they adapt their technologies to their needs
(socially shaped and culturally informed and
doubly-articulated).
• Technologies may be used in ways unanticipated by
designers (affordance), which will change over time
(interpretive flexibility and life course).
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

10. 10
“Mutual Intelligibility”
Shared “Understanding”
Person Machine
Rationale
Actions not Actions Effects
not
available available available
available
to the to the to the
to the
machine machine person
person
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

11. 11
Inter-Disciplinarity
Socio-Cultural Technical
Rationale
The “social” Observations
Observations influenced by
available to available to
available to observations
the social + the social + the technical = of the social
researcher researcher
researcher and technical
(context) (meaning)
researcher
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

12. 12
Where will I focus?
?
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

13. 13
How will I do it?
• Visualisation of the spaces in which an assistive technology
needs to be fitted
• Interviews with people, family carers and professional health
care workers to explore their experiences and the effects of
assistive technologies on social relations
• Observation of daily routines including the introduction of
assistive technologies and the process of domestication
• Observation of the ways in which people learn to personalise
their technology including details of learning processes.
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

14. 14
Why is this important?
• We are living longer which is creating increased demand for
health and social care services
• We want to help people retain their independence and foster
participation in society rather than encouraging dependency and
reliance upon statutory provision
• The potential of assistive technologies to help older people and
disabled people achieve independent lives is recognised by industry
with products being derived from lab-based research and user trials.
However, there is an assumption that controlled user studies and
technology development cycles produce usable and desirable
technology that will seamlessly become integrated and embedded
into everyday contexts.
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

15. The Hunting of the Snark
“Just the place for a Snark!” the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.
“Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What I tell you three times is true.”

16. 16
http://sociologicialsoliloquies.tumblr.com/
SOCIOLOGICIALSOLILOQUIES.TUMBLR.COM
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

17. 17
Bibliography
• Ackerman, M. (2000). The intellectual challenge of • Miskelly, F. G. (2001). Assistive technology in
CSCW: The gap between social requirements and elderly care. Age and Ageing, 30(6): 455-458.
technical feasibility. Human-Computer Interaction, • Pinch, T. J. and Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social
15(2): 179-203. construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the
• Berker, T., Hartmann, M., Punie, Y. and Ward, K. sociology of science and the sociology of
(2006). Introduction. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. technology might benefit each other. Social Studies
Punie and K. J. Ward, eds. Domestication of media of Science, 14(3), 399-441.
and technology, Maidenhead: Open University • Silverstone, R., Hirsch, E. and Morley, D. (1992).
Press, pp.1-17. Information and communication technologies and
• Godfrey, M. and Johnson, O. (2009). Digital circles the moral economy of the household. In R.
of support: Meeting the information needs of older Silverstone and E. Hirsch, eds. Consuming
people. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3): technologies: Media and information in domestic
633-642. spaces, London: Routledge, pp.15-31.
• McLoughlin, I. (1999). Creative technological • Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions:
change: The shaping of technology and The problem of human-machine communication.
organisations, London: Routledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16/11/2011 © The University of Sheffield

18. To
Discover
And
Understand.