skip to main content
10.1145/3313831.3376805acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Facilitating Democracy: Concerns from Participatory Design with Asymmetric Stakeholder Relations in Health Care

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 April 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper addresses how facilitation can implicate what, whose and how perspectives and values become embedded in the results from participatory design activities. Inspired by Donald Schön's reflection-on-action theory, an analysis of our facilitator performances in three design activities involving health care stakeholder groups with asymmetric relations has been performed. The analysis highlights the often subtle and unforeseen ways by which facilitator actions influence who "has a say". The results emphasize how continuous introspective analyses and reflections may improve the facilitator's attentiveness to actions that may inadvertently impede the disfavored party. In the long-term, neglect may threaten the integrity of participatory design as a democratic and empowering design approach. The shift towards a practice-perspective on facilitation goes beyond the efforts of the individual practitioner. The cultivation of the reflective facilitator, a concern of relevance for the Human?Computer Interaction and Participatory Design community as a whole, is considered.

References

  1. Mariam Asad and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2019. "This Is Shared Work:" Negotiating Boundaries in a Social Service Intermediary Organization. Media and Communication. 7, 3, 69--78. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.2171Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Liam Bannon, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Susanne Bødker. 2018. Introduction: Reimagining Participatory Design-Emerging Voices. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Olav Wedege Bertelsen and Per-Olof Hedvall. 2009. New Challenges for Participation in Participatory Design in Family, Clinical and Other Asymmetrical, Non-work Settings. In Proceedings of the 12th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Part II, 971--972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642-03658--3_136Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Erling Björgvinsson, Pelle Ehn, and Per-Anders Hillgren. 2010. Participatory design and "democratizing innovation". In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, 41--50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1900441.1900448Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Gillie Bolton. 2001. Reflective Practice: Writing and Professional Development. Paul Chapman Publishing, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Tone Bratteteig and Ina Wagner. 2012. Disentangling power and decision-making in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers - Volume 1, 41--50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2347635.2347642Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Tone Bratteteig and Ina Wagner. 2016. Unpacking the Notion of Participation in Participatory Design. Comput. Supported Coop. Work. 25, 6, 425--475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10606-016--9259--4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Susanne Bødker, Morten Kyng, Pelle Ehn, John Kammersgaard, and Yngve Sundblad. 1987. A Utopian Experience. Computers and Democracy - a Scandinavian Challenge, 251--278.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Sarah Collins, Nicky Britten, Johanna Ruusuvuori, and Andrew Thompson. 2007. Patient Participation in Health Care Consultations: Qualitative Perspectives. Open University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yngve Dahl and Kristine Holbø. 2012. "There are no secrets here!": professional stakeholders' views on the use of GPS for tracking dementia patients. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services, 133--142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2371574.2371595Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Yngve Dahl, Hanne Linander, and Geir Kjetil Hanssen. 2014. Co-designing interactive tabletop solutions for active patient involvement in audiological consultations. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 207--216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2639221Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Yngve Dahl and Erica Löfström. 2019. Supporting Social Interaction in Care Environments: Exploring Stakeholder Perspectives on the Potential of Interactive Technology. International Journal of Human-- Computer Interaction. 35, 1, 53--64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1426897Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Yngve Dahl, Jarl Kåre Reitan, and Anita Das. 2018. Value tensions in telecare: an explorative case study. In Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 559--570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3240167.3240168Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Anita Das and Dag Svanæs. 2013. Human-centered methods in the design of an e-health solution for patients undergoing weight loss treatment. Int. J. Med. Inform. 82, 11, 1075--1091. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.201 3.06.008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Helen Forbes, et al. 2016. Use of videos to support teaching and learning of clinical skills in nursing education: A review. Nurse Educ. Today. 42, 53--56. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.04 .010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Christopher Frauenberger, Judith Good, Geraldine Fitzpatrick, and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2015. In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 74, 93--106. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09 .004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Kim Halskov and Nicolai Brodersen Hansen. 2015. The diversity of participatory design research practice at PDC 2002--2012. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 74, C, 81--92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kristine Holbø, Silje Bøthun, and Yngve Dahl. 2013. Safe walking technology for people with dementia: what do they want? In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 1--8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2513383.2513434Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Harald Holone and Jo Herstad. 2013. Three tensions in participatory design for inclusion. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2903--2906. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2481401Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sofia Hussain. 2013. Ethical Leadership in Participatory design. In IASDR 2013: 5th Intl Congress of the Intl Association of Societies of Design Research,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Kathleen Iannello. 1992. Decisions Without Hierarchy. New York: Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. ISO 9241--210. 2019. Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centered design for interactive systems. International Organization for Standardization.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Janet Kelly. 2018. Towards ethical principles for participatory design practice. CoDesign, 1--16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1502324Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Finn Kensing and Joan Greenbaum. 2012. Heritage: having a say. In Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Ann Light and Yoko Akama. 2012. The human touch: participatory practice and the role of facilitation in designing with communities. In Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers - Volume 1, 61--70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2347635.2347645Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Stephen Lindsay, et al. 2012. Empathy, participatory design and people with dementia. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 521--530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2207749Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Rachael Luck. 2007. Learning to talk to users in participatory design situations. Design Studies. 28, 3, 217--242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.02.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Brenna McNally, Matthew Louis Mauriello, Mona Leigh Guha, and Allison Druin. 2017. Gains from Participatory Design Team Membership as Perceived by Child Alumni and their Parents. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 5730--5741. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025622Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Roisin McNaney, et al. 2015. Designing for and with People with Parkinson's: A Focus on Exergaming. Association for Computing Machinery, Seoul, Republic of Korea.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Michael J. Muller and Sarah Kuhn. 1993. Participatory design. Commun. ACM. 36, 6, 24--28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/153571.255960Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Suvi Pihkala and Helena Karasti. 2016. Reflexive engagement: enacting reflexivity in design and for 'participation in plural'. In Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full papers Volume 1, 21--30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2940299.2940302Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Toni Robertson and Jesper Simonsen. 2012. Participatory Design: an introduction. In Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Gary Rolfe. 2014. Rethinking reflective education: What would Dewey have done? Nurse Education Today. 34, 8, 1179--1183. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2014.03 .006Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Gary Rolfe, Dawn Freshwater, and Melanie Jasper. 2001. Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: a user's guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Donald A. Schön. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Ameneh Shamekhi, Q. Vera Liao, Dakuo Wang, Rachel K. E. Bellamy, and Thomas Erickson. 2018. Face Value? Exploring the Effects of Embodiment for a Group Facilitation Agent. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1--13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173965Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Petr Slovák, Christopher Frauenberger, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2017. Reflective Practicum: A Framework of Sensitising Concepts to Design for Transformative Reflection. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2696--2707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025516Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Dag Svanæs and Jan Gulliksen. 2008. Understanding the context of design: towards tactical user centered design. In Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: building bridges, 353362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1463160.1463199Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Dag Svanæs and Gary Seland. 2004. Putting the users center stage: role playing and low-fi prototyping enable end users to design mobile systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 479--486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/985692.985753Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Mamello Thinyane, Karthik Bhat, Lauri Goldkind, and Vikram Kamath Cannanure. 2018. Critical participatory design: reflections on engagement and empowerment in a case of a community based organization. In Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers - Volume 1, 1--10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210601Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Tonya R. Tripp and Peter J. Rich. 2012. The influence of video analysis on the process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education. 28, 5, 728--739. http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.01. 011Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Tuba U?ra?, Kerem Rizvano?lu, and Sevinç Gülseçen. 2018. Reaching a Consensus through Participatory Design with Children: The Two-Way Approach. In Proceedings of the 32nd International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference (HCI 2018), http://dx.doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2 018.218Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. John Vines, Rachel Clarke, Peter Wright, John McCarthy, and Patrick Olivier. 2013. Configuring participation: on how we involve people in design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 429--438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470716Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Ina Wagner. 1993. Women's voice: The case of nursing information systems. AI & SOCIETY. 7, 4, 295--310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01891413Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Facilitating Democracy: Concerns from Participatory Design with Asymmetric Stakeholder Relations in Health Care

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2020
      10688 pages
      ISBN:9781450367080
      DOI:10.1145/3313831

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 April 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format