Designing for wearability

Abstract

This paper presents a Wearer-Centered Framework (WCF) developed to support designing for good wearability in animal biotelemetry. Firstly, we describe the framework and the systematic process followed to develop it. Then, we report on how the WCF was evaluated with three teams of designers, who used it collaboratively to design a catcentered tracking collar during dedicated workshops. We discuss our analysis of the designers' dialogues, whose aim was to understand the extent to which the framework informed the designers' thinking. Our findings indicate that the WCF was a useful tool to support the systematic elicitation of wearability requirements. They also suggest that designers could be provided with additional tools to support the WCF's application more effectively.

Modular E-Collar for Animal Telemetry: An Animal-Centered Design Proposal

“…The presented device represents a telemetric option whose design process has put the user at the center, especially the animal user, through an animal-centered design strategy that could be followed in future research. In this way, the concept of the GPS collar has evolved, traditionally chaired by a central module that housed practically all the electronic elements and that did not attend to the premise that wearable devices must be able to collect accurate and reliable data without influencing the behaviors and activities of carrier users [ 49 ]. This device solves many of the existing problems in animal telemetry devices and contributes to improving the current offer on the market: Homogeneous distribution of weight in at least six modules; Three times lighter than devices on the market with the highest number of modules (2–3 modules); Design flexibility: modularity and 3D printing; Modular electronics on demand of the project with customizable functions; Extra-light unions with a reduced number of pieces (one piece per module compared to 6–8 on the market); Tightness and resistance to environmental conditions; Collar thickness of at least 50% less than that of commercial devices; Quick magnetic closure system; Wirelessly rechargeable batteries and homogeneous distribution on the collar in case of higher demand; and Formal adaptation to the requirements of the context and visually integrated elements.…”

Experimentally optimized and field validated three-dimensional electromagnetic energy harvester for smart farming applications

“…On the other hand, non-human animals haven't been studied as intensively in energy harvesting scenarios. The animal wearable weight rule states that the animal wearable shouldn't weigh more than 2-5% of the total animal body weight [13]. Based on this we hypothesize that wearables for large ungulates (cattle, sheep, pigs, and goats) used to carrying heavy loads (i.e.…”

Toward an integrated ethical review process: an animal-centered research framework for the refinement of research procedures

“…These principles were derived from the field of Animal-Computer Interaction ( 5 , 9 ), whose aims include the study and design of animal-centered technology and animal-centered research methods to enhance animals’ welfare, increase their autonomy, support their activities and improve their standing in human society. The field’s animal-centered perspective is grounded in both ethical and scientific considerations, whereby technologies designed to be consistent with animals’ characteristics, usability and experience requirements are more likely to be effective [e.g., biotelemetry devices designed to optimize wearability produce lower welfare impact and provide greater data reliability—Paci et al ( 9 ); computing interfaces with which animals are expected to interact to complete given tasks need to be consistent with their sensory, cognitive, physical and behavioral characteristics—Ruge et al ( 10 )]. Similarly, Mancini and Nannoni ( 4 ) argued that research designs which take an animal-centered perspective are more likely to deliver scientifically valid results and, thus, greater societal benefits.…”

“…The ethical approach of ACI recognizes the centrality of animals’ capabilities for the design of interactive systems and the importance of animals’ dignified participation in research to ensure the effectiveness of said systems, thus regarding the animals involved as legitimate stakeholders within the research process ( 5 ). This approach has informed a range of applications in different domains, including, for example: the design of dog-friendly interfaces enabling mobility assistance dogs to operate domestic appliances on behalf of their assisted humans [e.g., ( 24 )]; the design of wearable biotelemetry devices for wild animals to minimize the impact of the technology on animal wearers [e.g., ( 9 )]; the design of digital enrichment devices for captive animals [e.g., ( 25 )]; apparatuses for behavioral or cognitive research on animals [e.g., ( 26 )]. ACI’s ethical approach has also informed the development of animal-centered design frameworks, such as the one proposed by Webber, Cobb, and Coe ( 27 ) to define animal-centric objectives and refine them through the course of a project, combining the “Five Domains of Animal Welfare” model (Nutrition, Environment, Physical Health, and Behavioral interactions, affecting together the final domain, Mental State) ( 28 ) and the “Coe Individual Competence” model (offering animals opportunities entailing Choice, Control, Variety, and Complexity, which all contribute to the development of Competence) ( 29 ).…”