Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3025453.3025787
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining Adult-Child Interactions in Intergenerational Participatory Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
73
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
73
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This array of potentially critical stakeholder perspectives requires careful attention to user identification, which can be optimized by incorporating a systematic user identification process (e.g., Kujala and Kauppinen 2004). This may be coupled with participatory HSRP design processes that incorporate design partnerships between adults and children (e.g., Druin 1999;Yip et al 2017), especially in cases (such as parent training EBPIs) that rely on effective interactions for therapeutic effects.…”
Section: Special Considerations For Designing Hsrps For Youth Mental mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This array of potentially critical stakeholder perspectives requires careful attention to user identification, which can be optimized by incorporating a systematic user identification process (e.g., Kujala and Kauppinen 2004). This may be coupled with participatory HSRP design processes that incorporate design partnerships between adults and children (e.g., Druin 1999;Yip et al 2017), especially in cases (such as parent training EBPIs) that rely on effective interactions for therapeutic effects.…”
Section: Special Considerations For Designing Hsrps For Youth Mental mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, when doing PD with children there are different kinds of activities than just observing children, and the designer may want to adopt different roles depending on the kind of activity. In the context of PD, Yip et al [30] have therefore defined four roles for adults that match the roles of children as previously defined by Druin [7]: users, testers, informants, and design partners. According to Yip et al [30], when the child is a user, the adult is an observer, when the child is a tester, the adult is a test facilitator, when the 2 Figure 3: Relationship between the adult researcher and children according to Fine and Glassner [8] child is an informant, the adult is an interpreter; and when the child is a design partner, the adult is also a design partner.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The related research discussed above provides some insights in the intricacies of doing PD as a hybrid practice where children and adults are involved. Fine and Glassner [8] showed that the role of the researcher may be defined by the presence or absence of certain dimensions and Yip et al [30] suggested an interdependency of roles by connecting the designer's role to the child's role. Neither of these two sources took the presence of other adults explicitly into account, although Fine and Glassner did state that "[t]he participant observer without formal authority must also gain rapport with adults, authorities, or guardians who are or potentially might be present".…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, we used a codesign methodology called Cooperative Inquiry (Figure ) to work closely with children, librarians, and researchers as equal design partners. Cooperative Inquiry examines how children and adults can work together as equal and equitable design partners (Druin, ; Yip et al, ). Figure summarizes the relationships of these design concepts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We highlight Javier's work as a librarian seeking more opportunities for digital instructional design and his design partnership with the KidsTeam UW children. Using a model of design partnerships (Yip et al, ), we analyzed video recordings and stakeholder interviews on how KidsTeam UW researchers and children (ages 7–11) worked together with adults at a library to develop new digital learning activities for children and family patrons. Our discussion focuses on the development of a conceptual model that situates and contextualizes youth librarians as design partners with youth.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%