Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

i-com

Journal of Interactive Media

Editor-in-Chief: Ziegler, Jürgen

Online
ISSN
2196-6826
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 17, Issue 2

Issues

Using Cultural Probes in the Sensitive Research Setting of Informal Caregiving. A Case Study

Susanne Hensely-Schinkinger
  • Corresponding author
  • Multidisciplinary Design & User Research, Institute of Visual Computing & Human-Centered Technology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Marén Schorch / Hilda Tellioğlu
  • Multidisciplinary Design & User Research, Institute of Visual Computing & Human-Centered Technology, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-08-07 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2018-0010

Abstract

This case study report covers our experiences in using Cultural Probes during the first phase of our European and interdisciplinary research project TOPIC (The Online Platform for Informal Caregivers). In that stage of our research, we focused on two major issues: first, describing and analyzing the characteristics of the care and coordination work of elderly informal caregivers, and second, on first implications for design for the field of informal care. Although our general methodological approach was qualitative (ethnographic) with participant observation and interviewing, we included Cultural Probes as an additional method to ethnography for gaining insight information about the care practices by the means of self-observation of and reflection by the informal caregivers. The paper describes our adaptation of the Cultural Probes approach, the similarities and differences to Gaver et al. [1999. Interactions. 6(1): 21–29], the items of our TOPIC Cultural Probes Kit in detail, and re-constructs the design process of one of the items (the actimoClock). Based on the experiences of our participants with the probes kit and our analyses of that use, we also present lessons learned, pros and cons for including that method in the sensitive setting of informal caregiving.

Keywords: Cultural Probes; informal caregivers; qualitative research; case study

References

  • [1]

    Bischofberger, I., Lademann, J., and Radvanszky, A. 2009. «work & care»–Erwerbstätigkeit und Pflege vereinbaren: Literaturstudie zu Herausforderungen für pflegende Angehörige. Betriebe und professionelle Pflege. Pflege. 22(4): 277–286.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [2]

    Boehner, K., Vertesi, J., Sengers, P., and Dourish, P. 2007. How HCI Interprets the Probs. Proceedings of the 2007 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1077–1086.Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Boehner, K., Gaver, W., and Boucher, A. 2012. Probes. In: (Lury, C., and Wakreford, N. eds) The Inventive Method: The Happening of the Social. Routledge, London/New York, pp. 185–201.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Breidenstein, G., Hirschauer, S., Kalthoff, H., and Niewand, B. 2013. Ethnografie. Die Praxis der Feldforschung. UVK Verlag. Konstanz.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Breskovic, I., de Carvalho, A. F. P., Schinkinger, S., and Tellioğlu, H. 2013. Social Awareness Support for Meeting Informal Carers’ Needs: Early Development in TOPIC. Adjunct Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 2, 3–8.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Burton, L. C., Zdaniuk, B., Schulz, R., Jackson, S., and Hirsch, C. 2003. Transitions in spousal caregiving. The Gerontologist. 43(2): 230–241.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [7]

    Carroll, J. M. 2000. Making Use: scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. MIT press. Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Carter, S., and Mankoff, J. 2005. When participants do the capturing: the role of media in diary studies. Proceedings of the 2005 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 899–908.Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Chwalisz, K., and Kisler, V. 1995. Perceived Stress: A Better Measure of Caregiver Burden. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 28(2): 88–98.Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Connelly, K., Rehman Laghari, K., Mokhtari, M., and Falk, T. 2014. Approaches to Understanding the Impact of Technologies for Aging in Place: A Mini-Review. Gerontology. 60: 282–288.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [11]

    Coon, D. W., and Evans, B. 2009. Empirically based treatments for family caregiver distress: What works and where do we go from here?. Geriatric Nursing. 30(6): 426–436.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [12]

    Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., Cheverst, K., Clarke, K., Dewsbury, G., Hughes, J., and Rouncefield, M. 2003. Designing with Care: Adapting cultural probes to inform design in sensitive settings. Proceedings of the Australian Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group. 4–13.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Dourish, P. 2006. Implications for design. Proceedings of the 2006 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 541–550.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Elmståhl, S., Dahlrup, B., Ekström, H., and Nordell, E. 2017. The association between medical diagnosis and caregiver burden: a cross-sectional study of recipients of informal support and caregivers from the general population study ‘Good Aging in Skåne’, Sweden. Aging clinical and experimental research. 1–10.Google Scholar

  • [15]

    Emlet, C. A. 1996. Assessing the informal caregiver: team member or hidden patient?. Home care provider. 1(5): 255–262.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16]

    Gaver, W. W., Boucher, A., Pennington, S., and Walker, B. 2004. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions: New Visions of Human-Computer Interaction. 11(5): 53–56.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [17]

    Gaver, W., Dunne, T., and Pacenti, E. 1999. Design: Cultural. Interactions. 6(1): 21–29.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [18]

    Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. L. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • [19]

    Graham, C., Rouncefield, M., Gibbs, M., Vetere, F., and Cheverst, K. 2007. How probes work. Proceedings of the 19th Australasian conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Entertaining User Interfaces. 29–37.Google Scholar

  • [20]

    Hensely-Schinkinger, S., de Carvalho, A. F. P., Glanznig, M., and Tellioğlu, H. 2015. The definition and use of personas in the design of technologies for informal caregivers. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 202–213.Google Scholar

  • [21]

    Hörl, J., Kolland, F., and Majce, G. 2008. Hochaltrigkeit in Österreich: Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Bundesministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Konsumentenschutz.Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Hughes, N., Locock, L., and Ziebland, S. 2013. Personal identity and the role of ‘carer’ among relatives and friends of people with multiple sclerosis. Social science & medicine. 96: 78–85.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [23]

    Hutchinson, H., Mackay, W., Westerlund, B., Bederson, B. B., Druin, A., Plaissant, C., Beaudoin-Lafon, M., Conversy, S., Evans, H., Hansen, H., Roussel, N., and Eiderbäck, B. 2003. Technology Probes: Inspiring Design for and with Families. Proceedings of the 2003 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 17–24.Google Scholar

  • [24]

    Kutner, G. 2001. AARP caregiver identification study. AARP.Google Scholar

  • [25]

    Long, K., Bakewell, L. L., McNaney, R. C., Vasileiou, K., Atkinson, M., Barreto, M., Barnett, J., Wilson, M., Lawson, S., and Vines, J. 2017. Connecting Those That Care: Designing for Transitioning, Talking, Belonging and Escaping. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1339–1351.Google Scholar

  • [26]

    Maaß, S., Schirmer, C., Bötcher, A., Buchmüller, S., Koch, D., and Schumacher, R. 2016. Partizipative Entwicklung von Technologien für und mit ältere/n Menschen. https://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/edocs/00105568-1.pdf. Accessed June 21, 2018.Google Scholar

  • [27]

    Maaß, S., and Buchmüller, S. 2018. The Crucial Role of Cultural Probes in Participatory Design For and With Older Adults. i-com. Journal of Interactive Media. (2): this issue.

  • [28]

    Magnusson, L., Hanson, E., Britto, L., Berthold, H., Chambers, M., and Daly, T. 2002. Supporting Family Carers Through the Use of Information and Communication Technology – the EU Project ACTION. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 39(2002): 369–381.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [29]

    Marino, V. R., Haley, W. E., and Roth, D. L. 2017. Beyond hedonia: A theoretical reframing of caregiver well-being. Translational Issues in Psychological Science. 3(4): 400–409.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [30]

    Mattelmäki, T., and Battarbee, K. 2002. Empathy probes. PDC 02 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. 266–271.Google Scholar

  • [31]

    McKee, K. J., Philp, I., Lamura, G., Prouskas, C., Öberg, B., Krevers, B., Spazzafumo, L., Bien, B., Parker, C., Nolan, M. R., and Szczerbinska, K. 2003. The COPE index–a first stage assessment of negative impact, positive value and quality of support of caregiving in informal carers of older people. Aging & Mental Health. 7(1): 39–52.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [32]

    Mello, J. D. A., Macq, J., Van Durme, T., Cès, S., Spruytte, N., Van Audenhove, C., and Declercq, A. 2017. The determinants of informal caregivers’ burden in the care of frail older persons: a dynamic and role-related perspective. Aging & mental health. 21(8): 838–843.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [33]

    Müller, C., Struzek, D., Schorch, M., and Neumann, M. 2017. Technology Probes als Mittel zur Unterstützung der Technik-Aneignung. In: (Burghardt, M., Wimmer, R., Wolff, C., and Womser-Hacker, C. eds) Mensch und Computer 2017. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., Regensburg, pp. 87–93.Google Scholar

  • [34]

    Müller, C., Neufeldt, C., Randall, D., and Wulf, V. 2012. ICT-development in residential care settings: Sensitizing design to the life circumstances of the residents of a care home. Proceedings of the 2012 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2639–2648.Google Scholar

  • [35]

    O’Connor, D. L. 2007. Self-identifying as a caregiver: Exploring the positioning process. Journal of Aging Studies. 21(2): 165–174.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [36]

    Oldenkamp, M., Bültmann, U., Wittek, R. P., Stolk, R. P., Hagedoorn, M., and Smidt, N. 2018. Combining informal care and paid work: The use of work arrangements by working adult-child caregivers in the Netherlands. Health & social care in the community. 26(1): 122–131.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [37]

    Pochobradsky, E. 2005. Situation pflegender Angehöriger: Endbericht. Bundesministerium für Soziale Sicherheit, Generationen u. Konsumentenschutz.Google Scholar

  • [38]

    Randall, D., Hughes, J., Sommerville, I., Rodden, T., and Bentley, R. 1993: Designing with Ethnography: Making Work Visible. Interacting with Computers. 5(2): 239–253.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [39]

    Sanders, L. 2001. Collective creativity. Design. 6(3): 1–6.Google Scholar

  • [40]

    Schinkinger, S., and Tellioğlu, H. 2014. Design Implications to Systems Supporting Informal Caregivers’ Daily Life. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 341–350.Google Scholar

  • [41]

    Schneider, U., Trukeschitz, B., Mühlmann, R., Jung, R., Ponocny, I., Katzlinger, M., and Österle, A. 2009. Wiener Studie zur informellen Pflege und Betreuung älterer Menschen 2008 (Vienna Informal Carer Study – VIC2008). Forschungsinstitut für Altersökonomie der Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien.Google Scholar

  • [42]

    Schorch, M., Wan, L., Randall, D., and Wulf, V. 2016. Designing for Those who are Overlooked. Insider Perspectives on Care Practices and Cooperative Work of Elderly Informal Caregivers. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 787–799.Google Scholar

  • [43]

    Schulz, R., and Beach, S. R. 1999. Caregiving as a risk factor for mortality: The Caregiver Health Effects Study. Jama. 282(23): 2215–2219.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [44]

    Seltzer, M. M., and Li, L. W. 1996. The transitions of caregiving: Subjective and objective definitions. The Gerontologist. 36(5): 614–626.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [45]

    Suchman, L. 1995. Making Work Visible. Communications of the ACM. 38(9): 56–64.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [46]

    Tellioğlu, H., Hensely-Schinkinger, S., and Pinatti De Carvalho, A. F. 2015. Modes of independence while informal caregiving. Studies in health technology and informatics. 217: 878–885.Google Scholar

  • [47]

    Tellioğlu, H., Ehrenstrasser, L., and Spreicer, W. 2012. Multimodality in Design of Tangible Systems. i-com Zeitschrift für interactive und cooperative Medien. 11(3): 19–23.Google Scholar

  • [48]

    Tixier, M., and Lewkowicz, M. 2016. “Counting on the Group”: Reconciling Online and Offline Social Support among Older Informal Caregivers. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3545–3558.Google Scholar

  • [49]

    United Nations Population Fund. 2012. Ageing in the Twenty-First Century: A Celebration and A Challenge. http://unfpa.org/ageingreport/. Accessed February 5, 2018.Google Scholar

  • [50]

    Vetere, F., Davis, H., Gibbs, M. R., Francis, P., and Howard, S. 2006. A magic box for understanding intergenerational play. Proceedings of the 2006 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1475–1480.Google Scholar

  • [51]

    Winkler, I., Kilian, R., Matschinger, H., and Angermeyer, M. C. 2006. Lebensqualität älterer pflegender Angehöriger von Demenzkranken. Zeitschrift für Gerontopsychologie &-psychiatrie. 19(1): 17–24.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Susanne Hensely-Schinkinger

Susanne Hensely-Schinkinger holds a Master in Medical Computer Science from the Vienna University of Technology and a Master in Nursing Studies from the University of Vienna. Currently she works as a PhD scholar at the Vienna University of Technology. Her research was integral part of the TOPIC project and her interests are centred on issues of technological support in the context of informal care.

Marén Schorch

Marén Schorch is a PostDoc researcher and leader of the junior research group “KontiKat” at the University of Siegen, Germany. She holds a PhD in Sociology and is specialized in qualitative social methods. From 2013–2016, she was head of the German part of the EU AAL project “TOPIC” (The Online Platform for Informal Caregivers). Her research and publication focus is in the fields of Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) and Sociology (qualitative methods and biography). She is especially interested in the way how people deal with extreme events, informal caregiving and health.

Hilda Tellioğlu

Hilda Tellioğlu is an Associate Professor at the Vienna University of Technology. As a computer scientist she has been involved with both research and teaching on: software engineering, design & development of information technology in networked (work) environments, computer support for co-operative work (CSCW) in systems design in health care work and in architectural planning, knowledge management, social networks, interaction design, tangible user interaction.


Published Online: 2018-08-07

Published in Print: 2018-08-28


Funding Source: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie

Award identifier / Grant number: 837737

Funding Source: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

Award identifier / Grant number: 16SV608K

Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche

Award identifier / Grant number: ANR-12-AALI-0002-03

The TOPIC project and its research has been funded by the European Union within the AAL Joint-Program (AAL-2012-5-169), the Austrian Ministry for Transport Innovation and Technology (Austria, Project number: 837737), the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Germany, Project number: 16SV608K), and the French National Research Agency (France, Project number: ANR-12-AALI-0002-03).


Citation Information: i-com, Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages 103–117, ISSN (Online) 2196-6826, ISSN (Print) 1618-162X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2018-0010.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in