Older adult insights for age friendly environments, products and service systems
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
It is estimated that by 2020, a quarter of the European population will be aged over 65, and expected to grow further by two million annually after 2012 [1] There is also an expectation that children born after 2011 may live to 100 years old [2], these factors are expected to impact on economy, social security and health care systems. The importance of these systems and environments to accommodate and adapt to our changing needs as we age presents opportunity to research through design. Environments, in the context of this paper, are the spaces, products and product service systems that we engage with, alone or with others, within and outside the home. A design coalition [3] was generated between a number of academic Institutions and ISAX (Ireland Smart Ageing Exchange) an ‘ageing think tank’ organisation in Ireland. The intention of this coalition was to generate awareness of needs requirements for older adults, in environments that facilitate and are beneficial. In addition, it would provide an example of how participatory design research can inform innovation in business and policy development at a local and state level.A five-week study was conducted using design and ethnographic methods with twenty-two Older Adult participants (age range 69 – 80). The themes of study were identified as: Mobility, Public Spaces, Safety, Social Engagement, Services & Facilities. Cultural probes, semi-structured interviews and user observation, by both researchers and older adult participants, were used as methods to identify the unmet needs of participants within the sample group. The outcomes of research were presented at a Co-Design Symposium in June 2016. This Symposium was attended by over 100 people of various backgrounds (town planners, architects, transport experts, retailers, builders, health and other service providers). The older adult participants and designers (staff and researchers from the School of Design at the University of Limerick, IT Carlow, Limerick Institute of Technology and Limerick School of Art & Design) were placed within a team of ten. The research was presented using audio/visual presentation as well as artefacts from the fieldwork, completed diaries, scrapbooks, storyboards etc. Solutions were worked on, and delivered at end of day. This Symposium has impacted positively whereby policy makers in local government have invited ISAX to further discuss research outcomes and needs of older adults as a means to develop access areas in and around Limerick City. This paper outlines in further detail the design research methods used and the benefits through design education Student/ Researcher /Stakeholder collaboration by application ‘in the ‘field’. New, relevant work: This work displays the effectiveness of design coalitions in influencing and affecting change and insight into policy. It highlights how Co-Design collaborations can impact and generate design solutions that improve day to day experiences.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».