Logo des Repositoriums

Auflistung nach Schlagwort "co-creation"

1 - 8 von 8
  • Workshop
    2nd International Workshop on Co-Creation of Hybrid Interactive Systems for Healthcare
    (Mensch und Computer 2024 - Workshopband, 2024) Weiler, Tim; Müller, Claudia; Struzek, David; Huldtgren, Alina; Klapperich, Holger; Grosskopp, Sabrina; Fischer, Florian; Osterheider, Angela; Gaertner, Wanda
    Recent advancements in data science and AI-driven healthcare technologies are bringing up novel opportunities for innovations, such as personalized medicine, self-diagnostic tools for everyday use, or hybrid healthcare models. However, the development of these technologies often overlooks the perspectives of patients and their families and socio-cultural surroundings, posing significant social, technological, and ethical challenges related to data bias, empowerment or surveillance, respectively. Bringing together interdisciplinary, interprofessional, and intersectoral collaboration in a systematic way seems to be a crucial element for adressing these issues and ensuring the meaningful integration of sensitive data and AI technologies into patient-centred healthcare arrangements. In this workshop, researchers and practitioners from diverse related disciplines, including HCI, AI, social and cultural sciences, healthcare, gerontology, etc., are invited to share their case studies on innovative health technologies and medical AI. Drawing from contextual best practices, as well as challenges and failures, the workshop organizers aim to collectively devise a systematic approach for co-designing and implementing telemedical innovations in real-world healthcare settings.
  • Workshopbeitrag
    Beteiligung älterer Menschen an der Entwicklung einer digitalen Plattform zur Rekrutierung von Betreuungs- und Pflegefachpersonen
    (Mensch und Computer 2022 - Workshopband, 2022) Braunwalder, Rhea; Molterer, Katharina; Misoch, Sabina
    In einem europäischen Forschungsprojekt sind ältere Menschen an der Entwicklung einer digitalen Plattform zur Rekrutierung von Pflegefachpersonen beteiligt. In diesem Position Paper werden der Forschungskontext sowie verschiedene Entwicklungsphasen vor dem Hintergrund der Beteiligung ältere Menschen am digitalen Endprodukt reflektiert. Von Seitens der Forschenden benötigt es im Prozess in der Interaktion mit Teilnehmenden Flexibilität, Rücksicht und Offenheit. In der interdisziplinären Zusammenarbeit in Teams von Forschenden sind der Informationstransfer, Transparenz und digitale kollaborative Plattformen zentral.
  • Workshopbeitrag
    Co-creating digital citizenship: Considering the reconfiguration of participation in digital public service design
    (Mensch und Computer 2019 - Workshopband, 2019) Jarke, Juliane
    Citizen-driven service development and the delivery of digital public services has become a central focus of policy makers at European and national level for the past decade. Across policy documents and funding calls, is the importance of user-centricity in service design repeated by referring to user involvement, empowerment, collaboration or personalisation [e.g. 1]. In particular, participatory design projects haven taken empowerment to be one of the their key objectives and claim that “participatory design methods themselves can be regarded as empowering” [9:6]. Hence, not surprisingly have policy makers and other public sector stakeholders started to promote civic participation in digital public sector innovation. Such participatory approaches go by labels such as co-production of public services [12], co-design [8] or civic technology [10]. Recently the term co-creation has gained attention and is now considered “a cornerstone for social innovation” in the public sector [12:1346]. For example, co-creation has become an approach promoted by organisations such as the European Commission (in the H2020 framework programme there are 76 calls on co-creation across a variety of topic areas) or associations such as the Open Government Partnership (which has recently published their own toolbox and good practice guide to co-creation in open government). However, there is not one definition of co-creation but rather there exists a multitude of understandings of the term within and beyond its use in public sector innovation [3]. There is a broad understanding that within the context of eGovernment, co-creation is meant to bring together government agencies, NGOs, citizens and/or businesses to spur innovation and lead to services that better fit the needs of its users. In the context of Open Government, it is meant to allow for new forms of collaboration and participation, in particular with respect to the re-use of open government data by civil society. Such initiatives place “numerous demands upon the digital conduct of citizens” [7:78] and enact “an imaginary of citizens as data analysts equipped with the skills necessary to […] analyse the transactions of governments and thus hold them to account” (p.82). It demands the active involvement and engagement in such activities and hence further advances imaginaries of civic collectivity in a digital age. This leads to what Isin and Ruppert [7] have called “digital citizenship”. Importantly, there remains a question about how citizen participation is configured in the design of digital public services. Vines et al. [11] rightly point out that we need to consider “who initiates, directs and benefits from user participation in design” (p.1) and how control is shared. This relates to a number of choices made in co-creation projects such as a project’s pre-conditions (openness, purpose, scope), its participants (diversity in knowledge, differences in interests, distribution of power), its results (outputs and outcomes) and process (types of activities/methods and setting) [5]. In my contribution to the MuC workshop, I would like to focus on the process dimension. That methods are not neutral but performative has long been argued in fields such Science and Technology Studies (STS) [e.g. 4,6]. The choice of methods in co-creation projects translates individual citizens into explorers, designers, data curators, users, and/or service providers. Co-creation methods stem from co-design and participatory design approaches (e.g. prototyping, probes, user testing) to civic open data use (e.g. data walks, hackathons) to co-production of services (e.g. partnerships between government and civil society organisations) and each come with their own construction and configuration of design participation and users. My reflection is based on a three-year EU-funded project in which we developed and evaluated methods for co-creating digital public services with older adults. I will draw on three co-creation processes that we conducted in two European cities: Bremen and Zaragoza. I will argue that depending on the problem focus, scoping and governance structures of the projects, methods were adopted differently and enabled older adults to assume differing roles in and control over the process and its results. For example, data walkshops in Bremen and Zaragoza facilitated different role-shifts for the participating older and allowed for different types of knowledge to be articulated [for an account of the German walks see 2]. This led to the enactment of different imaginaries of digital citizenship. Acknowledgements: This paper was developed as part of the MobileAge project which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 693319. References: 1. Katarina L. Gidlund. 2012. Designing for all and no one - practitioners understandings of citizen driven development of public e-services. Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference on Research Papers: Volume 1 - PDC ’12, ACM Press, 11. 2. Juliane Jarke. 2019. Open government for all? Co-creating digital public services for older adults through data walks. Online Information Review. 3. Juliane Jarke, Irina Zakharova, Gabriela Molina León, Hendrik Heuer, and Ulrike Gerhard. under review. Beyond Participation: A Review of Co-Creation. . 4. John Law. 2004. After method. Routledge, London. 5. J. J. Lee, M. Jaatinen, A. Salmi, T. Mattelmäki, R. Smeds, and M. Holopainen. 2018. Design choices framework for co-creation projects. International Journal of Design 12, 2: 15–31. 6. Annemarie Mol. 2010. Actor-Network Theory: Sensitive Terms and Enduring Tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 50, 1: 253–269. 7. Evelyn Ruppert and Engin Isin. 2015. Being digital citizens. Rowman & Littlefield, London; New York. 8. Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders and Pieter Jan Stappers. 2008. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4, 1: 5–18. 9. Hanna Schneider, Malin Eiband, Daniel Ullrich, and Andreas Butz. 2018. Empowerment in HCI - A Survey and Framework. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’18, ACM Press, 1–14. 10. Andrew R. Schrock. 2016. Civic hacking as data activism and advocacy: A history from publicity to open government data. New Media & Society. 11. John Vines, Rachel Clarke, Peter Wright, John McCarthy, and Patrick Olivier. 2013. Configuring participation: on how we involve people in design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Pages, ACM Press, 429–438. 12. W. H. Voorberg, V. J. J. M. Bekkers, and L. G. Tummers. 2015. A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review 17, 9: 1333–1357.
  • Konferenzbeitrag
    Co-creating digital public services with older citizens: Challenges and opportunities
    (INFORMATIK 2019: 50 Jahre Gesellschaft für Informatik – Informatik für Gesellschaft, 2019) Jarke, Juliane; Gerhard, Ulrike; Kubicek, Herbert
    Older citizens are excluded above average from digital public services as they do not meet older adults’ needs and expectations. Yet most digital technologies, designed for an ageing population, reproduce particular images about age and ageing, such as the old age defined by ill health, deficits and limitations or an emphasis on active ageing. Digital public services are no different. We are interested in understanding through what kind of methods older adults may be enabled to become active co-creators of information systems and in so doing may transform our images of an ageing population. The paper is based on a collaborative research project in which older adults co-created a digital neighbourhood guide. We describe a framework of interventions which facilitated the co-creation process and discuss associated challenges and opportunities.
  • Workshopbeitrag
    Doing Scheduling? The Construction of Agency and Memory while Programming a Reminder Robot with a Person with Severe Brain Injury
    (Mensch und Computer 2019 - Workshopband, 2019) Krummheuer, Antonia; Rehm, Matthias; Rodil, Kasper
    The paper argues that the field of human-robot interaction needs a distributed and socially situated understanding of reminding and scheduling practices to meet the needs of people with cognitive disabilities in the design of reminder robots. These results are based on a embodied interaction analysis of video recorded interactions of a co-creation process in which the participants test a reminder-robot prototype that was designed for and with people with acquired brain injury.
  • Konferenzbeitrag
    Partizipative Softwareentwicklung mit älteren Menschen – soziale Teilhabe oder Reproduktion von Benachteiligung?
    (Mensch und Computer 2018 - Workshopband, 2018) Gerhard, Ulrike; Jarke, Juliane
    Gemeinsam mit älteren Menschen haben wir im Rahmen des von der EU-geförderten Projekts „MobileAge“ in zwei Bremer Stadtteilen zwei webbasierte Anwendungen zur Orientierung im Stadtteil entwickelt. Die beiden Online-Dienste sollen zur sozialen Inklusion der dort lebenden Rentnerinnen und Rentner beitragen sollen. Gerade durch die Möglichkeit zur substantiellen Mitgestaltung der Anwendungen durch die späteren Nutzerinnen und Nutzer soll(te) deren soziale Teilhabe verbessert werden; Von Beginn an wurden ältere Bürgerinnen und Bürger in den Prozess einbezogen. Insbesondere in der Ideenfindungs- und Konzeptentwicklungsphase wurde den Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmern die Gelegenheit gegeben den zu entwickelnden Dienst zu definieren. Dadurch sollte sichergestellt werden, dass etwas für sie Sinnstiftendes entwickelt wird. Entstanden sind zwei digitale Stadtteil-Wegweiser, die insbesondere über Möglichkeiten der Freizeitbeschäftigung und der sozialen Interaktion informieren und zum Entdecken des Stadtteils und der Bewegung im Freien anregen. Der Fokus auf kulturelle, sportliche und soziale Aktivitäten verwundert nicht, wenn man sich die Gruppe der Gestalterinnen und Gestalter ansieht: In beiden Stadtteilen konnten wir ausschließlich Menschen für unser Projekt begeistern, die überwiegend körperlich fit, relativ gebildet und relativ gut vernetzt sind. Für diese privilegierten älteren Menschen bieten die beiden Anwendungen reichhaltiges Informationsmaterial zu aktiven Freizeitgestaltung. Inwieweit die Anwendung relevant ist für immobile, körperlich und geistig gebrechliche, sozial benachteiligte, isolierte Menschen ist bisher unbestimmt. Es besteht die Gefahr, dass die Kluft zwischen Menschen in multiplen Problemlagen und denen die in vielerlei Hinsicht gut gestellt sind, weiterwächst. Beteiligungsprojekte stehen grundsätzlich vor der Herausforderung benachteiligte Gruppen zu erreichen. Aufgrund der Affordanzen technischer Systeme und der möglichen sozialen Implikationen muss nicht zuletzt die partizipative Technikgestaltung sich dieser Herausforderung stellen. Die Logik der die meisten Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprojekte folgen, ist darauf nicht vorbereitet. Raum für experimentelle Formen der Beteiligung gibt es wenig, Projektergebnisse müssen in strikt definierten zeitlichen Rahmen produziert werden. Für die zeitintensive Rekrutierung und Einbeziehung von schwerreichbaren Zielgruppen bleibt häufig wenig Raum. Das Paradox von Beteiligungsverfahren schlägt sich nieder: Einige Wenige werden zu Sprecher*innen von Vielen. Daher möchten wir die Frage diskutieren: Können wir überhaupt sozialverträgliche Technik partizipativ gestalten? Und wenn ja, wie? Oder trägt gerade die Partizipation einiger Weniger zur Exklusion Vieler bei?
  • Konferenzbeitrag
    Using cultural probes for co-creating a digital neighbourhood guide with and for older adults
    (Mensch und Computer 2017 - Workshopband, 2017) Jarke, Juliane; Gerhard, Ulrike
    In this paper we reflect on our experiences of using cultural probes for co-creating a digital neighbourhood guide with and for older adults. We will focus on a specific set of probes that relate to the spatial dimension of social inclusion of older citizens with respect to their sense of attachment, their sense of security and familiarity as well as their sense of identity. Based on our experience in two different districts in the city of Bremen and different groups of older adults we present some first insights into how probes may establish older adults as experts in the design process or increase feelings of limitation and deficiency.
  • Zeitschriftenartikel
    Using Probes for Sharing (Tacit) Knowing in Participatory Design: Facilitating Perspective Making and Perspective Taking
    (i-com: Vol. 17, No. 2, 2018) Jarke, Juliane; Gerhard, Ulrike
    The sharing of expertise and tacit knowing is one of the core objectives in participatory design projects. This paper focuses on the role of probes for sharing users’ tacit knowing. We will introduce the concept of “boundary objects” [22], [21] to analyse how probes facilitate perspective taking and perspective making between users and between users and researchers. In so doing, we demonstrate that probes can facilitate the sharing of users’ tacit knowing and expertise (i) by making and explicating individual users’ perspectives, (ii) by enabling participants to take each other’s perspective and make a joint perspective and (iii) by subsequently enabling the making of a joint vision on the digital design outcome. The research presented in this paper is based on an EU-funded research and innovation project in which we co-created digital neighbourhood guide with older adults. We report from our fieldwork in city 1, where we used probes as part of our participatory design practice.