Xassess: crossdisciplinary framework in user-centred design of assistive products

References

• Afacan, Yasemin, and Halime Demirkan. 2010. “A Priority-Based Approach for Satisfying the Diverse Users’ Needs, Capabilities and Expectations: A Universal Kitchen Design Case.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (2–3): 315–343. doi: 10.1080/09544820903303423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthanat, Sajay, Stephen M. Bauer, James A. Lenker, Susan M. Nochajski, and Yow Wu B. Wu. 2007. “Conceptualization and Measurement of Assistive Technology Usability.” Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2 (4): 235–248. doi: 10.1080/17483100701343665
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Artoni, Silvia, Maria Claudia Buzzi, Marina Buzzi, and Claudia Fenili. 2011. “Didactic Software for Autistic Children.” In Advances in New Technologies, Interactive Interfaces, and Communicability, 73–80. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Barton, J. A., Doug M. Love, and G. D. Taylor. 2001. “Design Determines 70% of Cost? A Review of Implications for Design Evaluation.” Journal of Engineering Design 12 (1): 47–58. doi: 10.1080/09544820010031553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batchelor, Rachel, and Ania Bobrowicz. 2014. “Empathic and Ethical Design of Technology.” Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction: Design and Development Methods for Universal Access: 8th International Conference, UAHCI 2014, Held as Part of HCI International 2014, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 22–27, Vol. 8513, 3–10.
   Google Scholar
• Beecher, Valerie, and Victor Paquet. 2005. “Survey Instrument for the Universal Design of Consumer Products.” Applied Ergonomics 36 (3): 363–372. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bericat, Eduardo. 1998. La Integración de los Métodos Cuantitativo Y Cualitativo en la Investigación Social: Significado Y Medida. Barcelona: Ariel.
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, Benjamin S. 2004. System Engineering Management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Blasco, R., T. Blanco, A. Marco, A. Berbegal, and R. Casas. 2014. “Needs Identification Methodology for Inclusive Design.” Behaviour & Information Technology. doi:10.1080/0144929x.2014.934289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brannen, Julia. 2005. “Mixing Methods: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches Into the Research Process.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8 (3): 173–184. doi: 10.1080/13645570500154642
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Tim. 2008. “Design Thinking.” Harvard Business Review 86 (6): 84–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucciarelli, Louis L. 1994. Designing Engineers. Baskerville, MA: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, R. I., D. J. De Beer, L. J. Barnard, G. J. Booysen, M. Truscott, R. Cain, M. J. Burton, D. E. Gyi, and R. Hague. 2007. “Design Evolution Through Customer Interaction with Functional Prototypes.” Journal of Engineering Design 18 (6): 617–635. doi: 10.1080/09544820601178507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso, Carlos, and P. John Clarkson. 2012. “Simulation in User-Centred Design: Helping Designers to Empathise with Atypical Users.” Journal of Engineering Design 23 (1): 1–22. doi: 10.1080/09544821003742650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J. L., and C.-R. Lee. 1993. “Qualitative Programming Method for Qualitative Design Evaluation in the Conceptual Design Stage.” Journal of Engineering Design 4 (3): 213–220. doi: 10.1080/09544829308914783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkson, John, Coleman Roger, Keates Simeon and Lebbon Cherie, eds. 2003. Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population. London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Clarkson, P. J., R. Coleman, I. Hosking, and S. Waller. 2007. Inclusive Design Toolkit. Cambridge: Engineering Design Centre, University of Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Clevenger, Caroline Murrie, John Riker Haymaker, and Andrew Ehrich. 2013. “Design Exploration Assessment Methodology: Testing the Guidance of Design Processes.” Journal of Engineering Design 24 (3): 165–184. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2012.698256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohene, Tira, Ron Baecker, and Elsa Marziali. 2005. “Designing Interactive Life Story Multimedia for a Family Affected by Alzheimer's Disease: A Case Study.” In Paper Presented at CHI'05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Portland, OR, USA, April, 1300–1303. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, Roger. 2001. Designing for our Future Selves. Universal Design Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Dawe, Melissa. 2007. “Reflective Design-in-Use: Co-Designing an Assistive Remote Communication System with Individuals with Cognitive Disabilities and their Families.” PhD diss., University of Colorado.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K., and Y. S. Lincoln. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Derelöv, Micael. 2008. “Qualitative Modelling of Potential Failures: On Evaluation of Conceptual Design.” Journal of Engineering Design 19 (3): 201–225. doi: 10.1080/09544820701255858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeRuyter, Frank. 1997. “The Importance of Outcome Measures for Assistive Technology Service Delivery Systems.” Technology and Disability 6 (1): 89–104. doi: 10.1016/S1055-4181(96)00197-5
   Google Scholar
• Desmet, Pieter, and Eva Dijkhuis. 2003. “A Wheelchair Can be Fun: A Case of Emotion-Driven Design.” Paper presented at proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 23–26.
   Google Scholar
• Diaper, Gordon. 1990. “The Hawthorne Effect: A Fresh Examination.” Educational Studies 16 (3): 261–267. doi: 10.1080/0305569900160305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dissinger, Frankie K. 2003. “Core Curriculum in Assistive Technology: In-Service for Special Educators and Therapists.” Journal of Special Education Technology 18 (2): 35–45.
   Google Scholar
• Dukic, Tania, M. Rönnäng, and Marita Christmansson. 2007. “Evaluation of Ergonomics in a Virtual Manufacturing Process.” Journal of Engineering Design 18 (2): 125–137. doi: 10.1080/09544820600675925
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escudero, Tomás. 2003. “From Tests to Current Evaluative Research. One Century, the 20th, of Intense Development of Evaluation in Education.” RELIEVE. Revista Electrónica De Investigación y Evaluación Educativa 9 (1): 11–43.
   Google Scholar
• Francis, Peter, Sandrine Balbo, and Lucy Firth. 2009. “Towards Co-Design with Users who Have Autism Spectrum Disorders.” Universal Access in the Information Society 8 (3): 123–135. doi: 10.1007/s10209-008-0143-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuhrer, Marcus J. 2000. “Subjectifying Quality of Life as a Medical Rehabilitation Outcome.” Disability & Rehabilitation 22 (11): 481–489. doi: 10.1080/096382800413961
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuhrer, M. J., J. W. Jutai, M. J. Scherer, and F. DeRuyter. 2003. “A Framework for the Conceptual Modelling of Assistive Technology Device Outcomes.” Disability & Rehabilitation 25 (22): 1243–1251. doi: 10.1080/09638280310001596207
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman-Deane, Joy, Patrick Langdon, and John Clarkson. 2010. “Key Influences on the User-Centred Design Process.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (2–3): 345–373. doi: 10.1080/09544820903364912
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guba, Egon G., and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 1981. Effective Evaluation: Improving the Usefulness of Evaluation Results Through Responsive and Naturalistic Approaches. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Guha, Mona Leigh, Allison Druin, and Jerry Alan Fails. 2008. “Designing with and for Children with Special Needs: An Inclusionary Model.” Paper presented at proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, Chicago, IL, USA, June 11–13.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, Frances, and Stephen Sprigle. 2003. “Cost Analyses in Assistive Technology Research.” Assistive Technology 15 (1): 16–27. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2003.10131886
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersh, Marion A. 2010. “The Design and Evaluation of Assistive Technology Products and Devices Part 2: Evaluation of Assistive Products.” International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation. Accessed December 2015. http://cirrie.Buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/311.
   Google Scholar
• Hersh, Marion A. 2011. “The Design and Evaluation of Assistive Technology Products and Devices Part 3: Outcomes of Assistive Products Use.” International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation. Accessed December 10, 2015. http://cirrie.Buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/312.
   Google Scholar
• House, Ernest R. 2010. Evaluating with Validity (PB). Beverly Hills, CA: IAP.
   Google Scholar
• Isaksson, Ola, Sven Keski-Seppälä, and Steven D. Eppinger. 2000. “Evaluation of Design Process Alternatives Using Signal Flow Graphs.” Journal of Engineering Design 11 (3): 211–224. doi: 10.1080/095448200750020996
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO/DIS 9241. 1998. International Standard, International Organization for Standardization. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, Daniel, John Clarkson, and Felicia Huppert. 2010. “Capability Measurement for Inclusive Design.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (2–3): 275–288. doi: 10.1080/09544820903303464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jutai, J. W., M. J. Fuhrer, L. Demers, M. J. Scherer, and F. DeRuyter. 2005. “Toward a Taxonomy of Assistive Technology Device Outcomes.” American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation / Association of Academic Physiatrists 84 (4, April): 294–302. doi: 10.1097/01.PHM.0000157313.88732.DC
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinsmann, Maaike, Jan Buijs, and Rianne Valkenburg. 2010. “Understanding the Complexity of Knowledge Integration in Collaborative new Product Development Teams: A Case Study.” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 27 (1): 20–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2010.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai, Morris K. 1991. “Field-Based Concerns about Fourth-Generation Evaluation Theory.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 3–7. ERIC Clearing House. Accessed December 2015. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED335393.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lenker, James A., and Victor L. Paquet. 2003. “A Review of Conceptual Models for Assistive Technology Outcomes Research and Practice.” Assistive Technology 15 (1): 1–15. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2003.10131885
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lepistö, Auli, and Saila Ovaska. 2004. “Usability Evaluation Involving Participants with Cognitive Disabilities.” Paper presented at proceedings of the Third Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Tampere, Finland, October 23–27.
   Google Scholar
• Lim, Christopher Sze Chong. 2010. “Designing Inclusive ICT Products for Older Users: Taking Into Account the Technology Generation Effect.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (2–3): 189–206. doi: 10.1080/09544820903317001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Yvonna S., and Egon G. Guba. 1989. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, Russell, Keith Case, Mark Porter, Steve Summerskill, Diane Gyi, Pete Davis, and Ruth Sims. 2010. “HADRIAN: A Virtual Approach to Design for all.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (2–3): 253–273. doi: 10.1080/09544820903317019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, Jennifer L., Beverley J. Norris, Elizabeth Murphy, and John A. Crowe. 2008. “Medical Device Development: The Challenge for Ergonomics.” Applied Ergonomics 39 (3): 271–283. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2007.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olander, Elin. 2011. Design as Reflection. Lund, Sweden: Lund University.
   Google Scholar
• Parette, Howard P., George R. Peterson-Karlan, Sean Smith, Tracy Gray, and Heidi Silver-Pacuilla. 2006. “The State of Assistive Technology: Themes from an Outcomes Summit.” Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits 3 (1): 15–33.
   Google Scholar
• Parette, Phil, Alan VanBiervliet, and Jack J. Hourcade. 2000. “Family-centered Decision-Making in Assistive Technology.” Journal of Special Education Technology 15 (1): 45–55.
   Google Scholar
• Park, Hyungjun, Jeong-Soo Son, and Kwan-Heng Lee. 2008. “Design Evaluation of Digital Consumer Products Using Virtual Reality-Based Functional Behaviour Simulation.” Journal of Engineering Design 19 (4): 359–375. doi: 10.1080/09544820701474129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pohlmeyer, Anna Elisabeth, Lucienne Blessing, Hartmut Wandke, and Julia Maue. 2009. “The Value of Answers Without Question [S]: A Qualitative Approach to User Experience and Aging.” In Human Centered Design: First International Conference, HCD 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19–24, 894–903. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Poulson, D. F., and S. J. Richardson. 1998. “USERfit – A Framework for User Centred Design in Assistive Technology.” Technology and Disability 9 (198): 163–171. doi: 10.1016/S1055-4181(98)00034-X
   Google Scholar
• Preiser, Wolfgang F. E., and Elaine Ostroff. 2001. Universal Design Handbook. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, Maggie, Joseph F. Wallace, Kenneth H. Knorr, David E. Yoder, Gary M. Moulton, Lawrence H. Trachtman, and Michael L. Jones. 2000. “Public and Private Partnerships: The Future for Assistive Technology.” Technology and Disability 12 (1): 29–40.
   Google Scholar
• Schalock, Robert L., Gordon S. Bonham, and Miguel A. Verdugo. 2008. “The Conceptualization and Measurement of Quality of Life: Implications for Program Planning and Evaluation in the Field of Intellectual Disabilities.” Evaluation and Program Planning 31 (2): 181–190. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.02.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer, Marcia J. 2002. “The Change in Emphasis from People to Person: Introduction to the Special Issue on Assistive Technology.” Disability & Rehabilitation 24 (1–3): 1–4. doi: 10.1080/09638280110066262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scriven, Michael. 2008. “The Concept of a Transdiscipline: And of Evaluation as a Transdiscipline.” Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation 5 (10): 65–66.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, Syed Ghulam Sarwar, and Ian Robinson. 2008. “Medical Device Technologies: Who is the User?” International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management 9 (2): 181–197. doi: 10.1504/IJHTM.2008.017372
   Google Scholar
• Sim, Siang Kok, and Alex H. B. Duffy. 2003. “Towards an Ontology of Generic Engineering Design Activities.” Research in Engineering Design 14 (4): 200–223. doi: 10.1007/s00163-003-0037-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson, Richard. 2002. “Technology & Disability: Research, Design, Practice, and Policy.” Paper presented at proceedings of the RESNA international conference, 25th Minneapolis, Minnesota: ERIC, June 27–July 1.
   Google Scholar
• Soderberg, Rikard, and Lars Lindkvist. 1999. “Computer Aided Assembly Robustness Evaluation.” Journal of Engineering Design 10 (2): 165–181. doi: 10.1080/095448299261371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stickel, M. Shone, S. Ryan, P. J. Rigby, and J. W. Jutai. 2002. “Toward a Comprehensive Evaluation of the Impact of Electronic aids to Daily Living: Evaluation of Consumer Satisfaction.” Disability and Rehabilitation 24 (1–3): 115–125. doi: 10.1080/09638280110066794
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, Vathsala I., Michelle Lockett, Douglas J. Usiak, and Sajay Arthanat. 2010. “Beyond Technology Transfer: Quality of Life Impacts From R&D Outcomes.” Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits 6 (1): 87–128.
   Google Scholar
• Swann, Cal. 2002. “Action Research and the Practice of Design.” Design Issues 18 (1): 49–61. doi: 10.1162/07479360252756287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teddlie, Charles, and Abbas Tashakkori. 2003. “Major Issues and Controversies in the Use of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioral Sciences.” In Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, edited by A. Tashakkori, and C. Teddlie, 3–50. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Thurlow, Martha, Gerald Tindal, Richard Powers, Preston Lewis, Cara Cahalan Laitusis, and Joan Breslin-Larson. 2007. Research on AT Outcomes and Large-Scale Assessments. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits 4 (1): 11–27.
   Google Scholar
• Van Isacker, Karel, Mariya Goranova-Valkova, and Petya Grudeva. 2008. “User Centred Design in an FP7 Elderly Project.” Procedures of UNITECH’08, Grabrovo.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, Viswanath, Susan A. Brown, and Hillol Bala. 2013. “Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Guidelines for Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Information Systems.” MIS Quarterly 37 (1): 21–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weightman, Andrew Patrick Hayes, Nick Preston, Raymond Holt, Matthew Allsop, Martin Levesley, and Bipinchandra Bhakta. 2010. “Engaging Children in Healthcare Technology Design: Developing Rehabilitation Technology for Children with Cerebral Palsy.” Journal of Engineering Design 21 (5): 579–600. doi: 10.1080/09544820802441092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Michael Chi Hung. 2010. “Memory Aids as Collaboration Technology.” PhD diss., University of Toronto, Grabrovo.
   Google Scholar