Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio

Ilustraciones, gráficas, fotografías

Autores:

Tipo de recurso:

Fecha de publicación:: 2022

Institución:: Universidad de Caldas

Repositorio:: Repositorio Institucional U. Caldas

Idioma:: eng
spa

id	REPOUCALDA_8d3962957d0b8ebb9a9d665c726f321f
oai_identifier_str	oai:repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co:ucaldas/17388
network_acronym_str	REPOUCALDA
network_name_str	Repositorio Institucional U. Caldas
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio Multidisciplinary co-exploration in the pre-design phase of assistive technologies. A case study
title	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
spellingShingle	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio Diseño Tecnología Co-exploración Multidisciplinario Discapacidad Sentido colectivo Co-diseño Co-exploration Multidisciplinary Disability Collective sense Co-design
title_short	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
title_full	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
title_fullStr	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
title_full_unstemmed	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
title_sort	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv	Gallego Gómez, Juan Diego DICOVI: Diseño y Cognición en Entornos Visuales y Virtuales (Categoría A1)
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv	Diseño Tecnología Co-exploración Multidisciplinario Discapacidad Sentido colectivo Co-diseño Co-exploration Multidisciplinary Disability Collective sense Co-design
topic	Diseño Tecnología Co-exploración Multidisciplinario Discapacidad Sentido colectivo Co-diseño Co-exploration Multidisciplinary Disability Collective sense Co-design
description	Ilustraciones, gráficas, fotografías
publishDate	2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv	2022-02-09T21:58:12Z 2022-02-09T21:58:12Z 2022-03-01
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv	Trabajo de grado - Doctorado http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06 Text info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis https://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv	https://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/handle/ucaldas/17388 Universidad de Caldas Repositorio institucional Universidad de Caldas https://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/
url	https://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/handle/ucaldas/17388 https://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/
identifier_str_mv	Universidad de Caldas Repositorio institucional Universidad de Caldas
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv	eng spa
language	eng spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv	Agredo-Delgado, V., Ruiz Melenje, P. H., Collazos, C. A., Moreira, F., & Fardoune, H. M. (2020). Catálogo de lineamientos metodológicos para apoyar el proceso de aprendizaje colaborativo. Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS), 21, 16. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.22204 Agree, E. M., & Freedman, V. A. (2003). A Comparison of Assistive Technology and Personal Care in Alleviating Disability and Unmet Need. The Gerontologist, 43(3), 335-344. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/43.3.335 Ahmadvand, A., Gatchel, R., Brownstein, J., & Nissen, L. (2018). The Biopsychosocial-Digital Approach to Health and Disease: Call for a Paradigm Expansion. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(5), e189. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9732 Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press. Angelini, L., Carrino, S., Abou Khaled, O., Riva-Mossman, S., & Mugellini, E. (2016). Senior Living Lab: An Ecological Approach to Foster Social Innovation in an Ageing Society. Future Internet, 8(4), 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi8040050 Arango Morales, X. A., & Cuevas Pérez, V. A. (2015). Método de análisis estructural: matriz de impactos cruzados multiplicación aplicada a una clasificación (Micmac). Métodos y técnicas cualitativas y cuantitativas aplicables a la investigación en ciencias sociale, 165- 233 Arlati, S., Spoladore, D., Mottura, S., Zangiacomi, A., Ferrigno, G., Sacchetti, R., & Sacco, M. (2019). Analysis for the design of a novel integrated framework for the return to work of wheelchair users. Work, 61(4), 603-625. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-182829 Arnau Ripollés, M. S., & Toboso Martín, M. (2008). La discapacidad dentro del enfoque de capacidades y funcionamientos de Amartya en [Disability within Amartya en’s capabilities and operations approach]. Araucaria. Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofía, Política y Humanidades, Año 10(20), 64-94. Aryana, B., Brewster, L., & Nocera, J. A. (2019). Design for mobile mental health: an exploratory review. Health and Technology, 9(4), 401-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-018-0271- 1 Ashby, W. R. (1991). Requisite Variety and Its Implications for the Control of Complex Systems. En Facets of Systems Science (pp. 405-417). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 4899-0718-9_28 Atlas.ti. (2018). Atlas.ti scientific software development GmbH: Qualitative data analysis. Bacha, J. A. (2017). Mapping Use, Storytelling, and Experience Design. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(2), 198-228. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651917746708 Bahler, D., Dupont, C., & Bowen, J. (1995). Mixed quantitative/qualitative method for evaluating compromise solutions to conflicts in collaborative design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 9(4), 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400002869 Barbosa Ardila, S. D., Villegas Salazar, F., & Beltrán, J. (2020). El modelo médico como generador de discapacidad. Revista Latinoamericana de Bioética, 19(37-2), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.18359/rlbi.4303 Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies (Annette Lavers, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang, 137. Benktzon, M. (1993). Designing for our future selves: the Swedish experience. Applied Ergonomics, 24(1), 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(93)90155-3 Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Group. Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., & Ståhlbrost, A. (2008). Participatory design: one step back or two steps forward? Proceedings of the tenth anniversary conference on participatory design 2008, 102-111 Biddiss, E., McPherson, A., Shea, G., & McKeever, P. (2013). The Design and Testing of Interactive Hospital Spaces to Meet the Needs of Waiting Children. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 6(3), 49-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/193758671300600305 Bixler, A. (2010). Accessibility Through Design. Occupational health & safety (Waco, Tex.), 79(9), 22-24 Brandt, E., Binder, T., & Sanders, E. B. N. (2012). Tools and techniques: Ways to engage telling, making and enacting. En J. Simonsen & T. Robertson (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. Routledge Bratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. (2014). Disentangling Participation. En R. Harper (Ed.), Disentangling participation; Power and Decision-making in participatory design. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06163-4 Bratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. (2016). What is a participatory design result? Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference on Full papers - PDC ’16, 1, 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1145/2940299.2940316 Burgstahler, . (200 ). Universal Design : Process , Principles , and Applications. DO-IT. Burkhardt, S. (2014). Biopsychosocial Approaches to Understanding Disability: Building Connections: How Teachers Matter. En Special Education International Perspectives: Biopsychosocial, Cultural, and Disability Aspects (Vol. 27, pp. 3-32). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0270-401320140000027001 Campbell, J., & Moyers, B. (1991). The Power of Myth. Anchor Books. Castaneda, L. (2018). A Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde (CIF) – um caminho para a Promoção da Saúde. Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance, 20(2), 229-233. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980- 0037.2018v20n2p229 Claes, C., van Hove, G., Vandevelde, S., van Loon, J., & Schalock, R. L. (2010). Person-centered planning: Analysis of research and effectiveness. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(6), 432-453. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-48.6.432 Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T., & Roberts, B. (1976). Subcultures, Cultures and Class: A theoretical overview. En Resistance Through Rituals (pp. 9-74). Routledge. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. En G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed Cognitions Psychological and Educational Considerations (pp. 23-74). Cambridge University Press Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J. A., & Ochoa, S. F. (2003). Collaborative Scenarios to Promote Positive Interdependence among Group Members. En Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 2806, pp. 356-370). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540- 39850-9_30 Collazos, C. A., Padilla-zea, N., Pozzi, F., Guerrero, L. A., Gutierrez, F. L., Collazos, C. A., Padillazea, N., Pozzi, F., & Guerrero, L. A. (2014). Design guidelines to foster cooperation in digital environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(3), 375-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2014.943277 Cooper, A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2007). About Face 3: The essentials of interaction design. En Wiley Publishing, Inc. (3.a ed.). Wiley. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153 Cortés, E., & Cru , A. (201 ). enerative Design as Tool for ocial nnovation : A Methodological Approach. Back to the Future [icdhs 10th + 1 Conference] Proceedings Book, October, 44-48. Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Third Edition. En Sage (Vol. 66). SAGE Publications, Inc. Dawood, I., & Underwood, J. (2010). Prioritising Variables of SMEs / Private Sector through Interpretive Structural Model ( ISM ). TG65 & W065 - Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, 146-160 De Couvreur, L., & oossens, R. (2011). Design for (every)one : co-creation as a bridge between universal design and rehabilitation engineering. CoDesign, 7(2), 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.609890 De Macedo Guimarães, L. B. (2012). Sociotechnical design for a sustainable world. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 13(2), 240-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2011.641230 De Saussure, F. (1966). Course in general linguistics, Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye in Collaboration With Albert Riedlinger. Translated, With an Introd. and Notes by Wade Baskin. McGraw-Hill Debrah, Ralitsa D., de la Harpe, R., & M’Rithaa, M. K. (2017). Design probes and toolkits for healthcare: Identifying information needs in African communities through service design. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S2120-S2134. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352730 Debrah, Ralitsa Diana, de la Harpe, R., & M’Rithaa, M. K. (201 ). Exploring design strategies to determine information needs of caregivers. 7th International DEFSA Conference Proceedings, 67-77. https://doi.org/978-1-77012-137-9 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The «what» and «why» of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Desmet, P., & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57-66. Díaz Velázquez, E. (2009). Reflexiones epistemológicas para una sociología de la discapacidad. Intersticios. Revista sociológica de pensamiento crítico, 3(2), 85-98. Dugstad, J., Eide, T., Nilsen, E. R., & Eide, H. (2019). Towards successful digital transformation through co-creation: a longitudinal study of a four-year implementation of digital monitoring technology in residential care for persons with dementia. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 366. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4191-1 Elbers, S., van Gessel, C., Renes, R. J., van der Lugt, R., Wittink, H., & Hermsen, S. (2021). Innovation in Pain Rehabilitation Using Co-Design Methods During the Development of a 147 Relapse Prevention Intervention: Case Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(1), e18462. https://doi.org/10.2196/18462 Engel, G. (1977). The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129-136. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.847460 Engeström, Y. (1990). Learning, working and imagining : twelve studies in activity theory. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy. Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. En Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 377-404). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.025 Federici, S., Meloni, F., & Borsci, S. (2016). The abandonment of assistive technology in Italy: a survey of National Health Service users. European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 52(4), 516-526 Findeli, A., Brouillet, D., Martin, S., Moineau, C., & Tarrago, R. (2008). Research Through Design and Transdisciplinarity: A Tentative Contribution to the Methodology of Design Research. En «FOCUSED» — Current Design Research Projects and Methods Swiss Design Network Symposium (pp. 67-91). Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1988). Disability Beyond Stigma: Social Interaction, Discrimination, and Activism. Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4560.1988.tb02045.x Francis, P., Mellor, D., & Firth, L. (2009). Techniques and Recommendations for the Inclusion of Users with Autism in the Design of Assistive Technologies. Assistive Technology, 21(2), 57-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400430902945561 Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 Friedman, B., Hendry, D. G., & Borning, A. (2017). A Survey of Value Sensitive Design Methods. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, 11(2), 63-125. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000015 Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Borning, A., & Huldtgren, A. (2013). Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. En interactions (Vol. 3, Número 6, pp. 55-95). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4 García-Acosta, G., Lange-Morales, K., Puentes Lagos, D. E., & Ruiz Ortiz, M. R. (2011). Addressing human factors and ergonomics in design process, product life cycle, and innovation: Trends in consumer product design. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design: Methods and Techniques, 133-154. García, V., Rubio, M., & García, G. (2007). Trauma Raquimedular. MEDICRIT Revista de Medicina Crítica, 4(3), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.5413/mrmc.2007.43.89 Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1145/291224.291235 Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. SAGE Publications. Gibson, C. B. (2001). From knowledge accumulation to accommodation: cycles of collective cognition in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.84 Godet, M. (1986). Introduction to la prospective. Futures, 18(2), 134-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(86)90094-7 reenhalgh, T., haw, ., Wherton, J., Hughes, ., Lynch, J., A’Court, C., Hinder, ., ahy, N., Byrne, E., Finlayson, A., Sorell, T., Procter, R., & Stones, R. (2016). SCALS: a fourthgeneration study of assisted living technologies in their organisational, social, political and policy context. BMJ Open, 6(2), e010208. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010208 Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). Controversias paradigmáticas, contradicciones y confluencias emergentes. En Paradigmas y perspectivas en disputa. Manual de investigación cualitativa.: Vol. II (pp. 38-78). Editorial Gedisa, S.A. Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: A comparative study Haraway, D. (2013). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. En Women, Science, and Technology (Vol. 3, Número 3, pp. 489- 506). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203427415-40 Hassenzahl, M. (2010). Experience Design: Technology for All the Right Reasons. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3(1), 1-95. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00261ED1V01Y201003HCI008 Hassenzahl, M., Eckoldt, K., Diefenbach, S., Laschke, M., Lenz, E., & Kim, J. (2013). Designing moments of meaning and pleasure. Experience design and happiness. International Journal of Design, 7(3), 21-31. Hernández, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw-Hill Interamericana editores. Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, M. del P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6.a ed.). McGraw-Hill. Howard, J., Fisher, Z., Kemp, A. H., Lindsay, S., Tasker, L. H., & Tree, J. J. (2020). Exploring the barriers to using assistive technology for individuals with chronic conditions: a metasynthesis review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1788181 Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 Imrie, R. (2004). Demystifying disability: a review of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Sociology of Health & iIlness, 26(3), 287-305. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2004.00391.x ISO. (2016). ISO - ISO 13485 — Medical devices. https://www.iso.org/iso-13485-medicaldevices.html Jiménez Lara, A. (2007). Conceptos y tipologías de la discapacidad. Documentos y normativas de clasificación más relevantes. En R. de Lorenzo & L. Pérez, Cayo (Eds.), Tratado sobre discapacidad (Aranzadi, pp. 177-205) John, C. (2015). What is co-design? \| Design for Europe. Design for Europe. http://designforeurope.eu/what-co-design Jones, J., & Pal, J. (2015). Counteracting Dampeners: Understanding technologyamplified capabilities of people with disabilities in Sierra Leone. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 15, 6:1--6:10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2737856.2738025 Jones, P. (2018). Contexts of Co-creation: Designing with System Stakeholders (pp. 3-52). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55639-8_1 Jones, P. H. (2014). Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems. En G. S. Metcalf (Ed.), Social Systems and Design (pp. 91-128). Springer Japan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54478-4_4 Kalpokaite, N., & Radivojevic, I. (2019). Best Practice Article: Analyzing Code Frequencies with ATLAS.ti 8 Windows & Mac: The Code-Document Table. https://atlasti.com/2019/01/11/analyzing-code-frequencies-with-atlas-ti-8-windows-macthe-code-document-table/ Karadayi-Usta, S. (2020). An Interpretive Structural Analysis for Industry 4.0 Adoption Challenges. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 973-978. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2018.2890443 Kinnear, T. C., & Taylor, J. W. (1989). Investigación de mercados: un enfoque aplicado. McGrawHill. Kleinsmann, M. S. (2006). Understanding collaborative design. Delft University of Technology. Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or on the Proposition That «Design Is Making Sense (Of Things)». Design Issues, 5(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511512 Larsson Ranada, Å., & Lidström, H. (2019). Satisfaction with assistive technology device in relation to the service delivery process—A systematic review. Assistive Technology, 31(2), 82-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2017.1367737 Lee, Y. (2008). Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the codesign process. CoDesign, 4(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875613 Li, G., Kou, G., & Peng, Y. (2018). A Group Decision Making Model for Integrating Heterogeneous Information. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 48(6), 982- 992. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2016.2627050 Li, J., Zhang, J., Ge, W., & Liu, X. (2004). Multi-scale methodology for complex systems. Chemical Engineering Science, 59(8-9), 1687-1700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2004.01.025 Luborsky, M. R. (1993). Sociocultural Factors Shaping Technology Usage: Fulfilling the Promise. Technology and disability, 2(1), 71-78. https://doi.org/10.3233/TAD-1993-2110 Lyle O’Brien, C., O’Brien, J., & Mount, B. (1 7). Person-Centered Planning Has Arrived … or Has It? Mental Retardation, 35(6), 480-484. https://doi.org/10.1352/0047- 6765(1997)035<0480:PPHAOH>2.0.CO;2 Maldonado, S. (2005). ¿Exclusión o discriminación?: el caso de las personas con discapacidad en el mercado laboral peruano. Observatorio de la Economía Latinoamericana, 3, 47. Malinverni, L., Schaper, M.-M., & Pares, N. (2019). Multimodal methodological approach for participatory design of Full-Body Interaction Learning Environments. Qualitative Research, 19(1), 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118773299 Mansell, J., & Beadle-Brown, J. (2004). Person-centred planning or person-centred action? A response to the commentaries. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2004.00176.x Manzini, E. (2015a). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. En MIT press. The MIT Press Manzini, E. (2015b). Design in the transition phase: a new design culture for the emerging design. Design Philosophy Papers, 13(1), 57-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14487136.2015.1085683 Margolin, V. (2007). Design for development: towards a history. Design Studies, 28(2), 111-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2006.11.008 Margolin, V., & Margolin, S. (2002). A «Social Model» of Design: Issues of Practice and Research. Design Issues, 18(4). Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Design Probes. University of Art and Design Helsinki. Mattelmäki, T. (2008). Probing for co-exploring. CoDesign, 4(1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875027 Max-Neef, M. A. (2005). Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological Economics, 53(1), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014 McCarthy, J., & Wright, P. (2004). Technology as experience. interactions, 11(5), 42. https://doi.org/10.1145/1015530.1015549 McCarthy, J., Wright, P., Wallace, J., & Dearden, A. (2006). The experience of enchantment in human–computer interaction. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(6), 369-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-005-0055-2 McLellan, H. (2000). Experience Design. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493100316238 Meskó, B., Radó, N., & yőrffy, Z. (201 ). Opinion leader empowered patients about the era of digital health: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 9(3), e025267. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025267 Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 710-720. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021- 9010.75.6.710 Michener, W. K., Allard, S., Budden, A., Cook, R. B., Douglass, K., Frame, M., Kelling, S., Koskela, R., Tenopir, C., & Vieglais, D. A. (2012). Participatory design of DataONE—Enabling cyberinfrastructure for the biological and environmental sciences. Ecological Informatics, 11, 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2011.08.007 Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. (2020). DisCAPACIDAD. https://www.minsalud.gov.co/proteccionsocial/Paginas/DisCAPACIDAD.aspx Moran, J. (2002). Interdisciplinarity (1.a ed.). Routledge. Moreno, J. L., & Jennings, H. H. (1938). Statistics of Social Configurations. Sociometry, 1(3/4), 342. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785588 Mosleh, W. S., & Larsen, H. (2020). Exploring the complexity of participation. CoDesign, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1789172 Murphy, R., & Jones, P. (2020). Leverage analysis. FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 13(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.3384 Naciones Unidas Asamblea. (2006). Convención sobre los derechos de las personas con discapacidad. En Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas (pp. 1-30). Naciones Unidas Asamblea Nasr, N., Leon, B., Mountain, G., Nijenhuis, S. M., Prange, G., Sale, P., & Amirabdollahian, F. (2016). The experience of living with stroke and using technology: opportunities to engage and co-design with end users. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(8), 653-660. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2015.1036469 Newman, M. E. J. (2011). Complex Systems: A Survey. American Journal of Physics, 79(8), 800- 810. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3590372 Nielsen, J. (1992). The usability engineering life cycle. Computer, 25(3), 12-22. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.121503 Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. En Basic Books (Número 1). Basic Books. Norman, D. A., & Stappers, P. J. (2015). DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(2), 83-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002 Norman, D., & Draper, S. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on HumanComputer Interaction. Oliva, R. (2004). Model structure analysis through graph theory: partition heuristics and feedback structure decomposition. System Dynamics Review, 20(4), 313-336. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.298 OMS. (2001). Clasificación Internacional del Funcionamiento, de la Discapacidad y de la Salud. Publicaciones de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, 1-288. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pep.0000245823.21888.71 Oosterlaken, I. (2009). Design for Development: A Capability Approach. Design Issues, 25(4), 91- 102. https://doi.org/10.1162/desi.2009.25.4.91 Oosterlaken, I., & Hoven, J. van den. (2012). The Capability Approach, Technology and Design (Vol. 5). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3879-9 Opsahl, T., Agneessens, F., & Skvoretz, J. (2010). Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Networks, 32(3), 245-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2010.03.006 Ottino, J. M. (2003). Complex systems. AIChE Journal, 49(2), 292-299. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690490202 Papanek, V. (1985). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change (2.a ed.). Thames & Hudson Ltd. Patil, G. P. (2014). Weighted Distributions. En Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online (pp. 1- 11). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat07359 Pérez Dalmeda, M. E., & Chhabra, G. (2019). Modelos teóricos de discapacidad: un seguimiento del desarrollo histórico del concepto de discapacidad en las últimas cinco décadas. Revista Española de Discapacidad, 7(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.5569/2340- 5104.07.01.01 Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2015). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(4), 505-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0358-z Pfisterer, K. J., Boger, J., & Wong, A. (2019). Prototyping the Automated Food Imaging and Nutrient Intake Tracking System: Modified Participatory Iterative Design Sprint. JMIR Human Factors, 6(2), e13017. https://doi.org/10.2196/13017 Phillips, B., & Zhao, H. (1993). Predictors of Assistive Technology Abandonment. Assistive Technology, 5(1), 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1993.10132205 Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard business review, 76(4), 97-105 Pirkl, J. J. (1 ). Transgenerational design : products for an aging population. Press, M., & Cooper, R. (2003). The Design Experience. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315240329 Pressman, R. S. (2005). Software engineering: a practitioner’s approach (7.a ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. Quintero, C. (2020). A review: accessible technology through participatory design. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1785564 Quintero, C., & Gallego, J. (2020). Interdisciplinary Co-Design Process of Assistive Technology in Value Elicitation. 9th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3439231.3439234 Rade, K. A., Pharande, V. A., & Saini, D. R. (2017). Interpretive Structural Modeling ( ISM ) for Recovery of Heat Energy. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 12(1), 83-92. Riemer-Reiss, M. L., & Wacker, R. R. (2000). Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66(3), 44-50. Rios, A., Miguel Cruz, A., Guarín, M. R., & Caycedo Villarraga, P. S. (2014). What factors are associated with the provision of assistive technologies: the Bogotá D.C. case. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 9(5), 432-444. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2014.936053 Robertson, T., & Wagner, I. (2013). Ethics: engagement, representation and politics-in-action. En Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design (pp. 84-105). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203108543-11 Rodríguez Díaz, S., & Ferreira, M. A. V. (2010). Desde la dis-capacidad hacia la diversidad funcional. Un ejercicio de dis-normalización. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 68(2), 289-309. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2008.05.22 Ruiz, M. B. R., & Díaz, A. L. A. (2003). ESTRATEGIAS DE AFRONTAMIENTO Y PROCESO DE ADAPTACIÓN A LA LESIÓN MEDULAR Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 Said Valbuena B, W., Montoya Carvajal, A., & Fernanda Pinzon, L. (2020). From a ludic Loom of Ideas to the Spiral of Intercultural Co-creation. Proceedings of the 16th Participatory Design Conference 2020 - Participation(s) Otherwise - Volume 1, 1, 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1145/3385010.3385022 Salcedo, A. S. (2006). PONENCIA XV JORNADAS EUBD. Tecnología de apoyo y sociedad de la información. Proyectos europeos. Revista General de Información y Documentación, 16(1), 51-63. Sanders, E. B.-N. (2000). Generative Tools for Co-designing. En S. A. R. Scrivener, L. J. Ball, & A. Woodcock (Eds.), Collaborative Design (pp. 3-12). Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0779-8_1 Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2014). Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning. CoDesign, 10(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2014.888183 Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068 Santi, M. F. (2015). Vulnerabilidad y ética de la investigación social: perspectivas actuales. Revista Latinoamericana de Bioética, 15(29-2), 52. https://doi.org/10.18359/rlbi.535 Sarmiento Pelayo, M. P. (2015). Co-design: A central approach to the inclusion of people with disabilities. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina, 63, 149-154. https://doi.org/10.15446/revfacmed.v63n3sup.49345 Scaife, M., Rogers, Y., Aldrich, F., & Davies, M. (1997). Designing for or designing with? Informant design for interactive learning environments. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems, 343-350. https://doi.org/10.1145/258549.258789 Scherer, M. J. (1996). Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disability and Rehabilitation, 18(9), 439-448. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289609165907 Scherer, M. J. (2015). Assistive Technology and Persons With Disabilities. En M. A. Stebnicki & I. Marini (Eds.), The Professional Counselor’s Desk Reference (pp. 475–481). Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826171825.0074 Scherer, M. J. (2020). It is time for the biopsychosocialtech model. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 15(4), 363-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1752319 Scherer, M. J., & Lane, J. P. (1 7). Assessing consumer profiles of ‘ideal’ assistive technologies in ten categories: An integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(12), 528-535. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289709166046 Schwarzkopf, E. (2013). Accessibility Through Design. Sharma, V., Grover, S., & Sharma, S. K. (2017). Analyzing the barriers affecting the effective utilization of quality tools and techniques using integrated ISM approach. Management Science Letters, 7(11), 525-540. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2017.8.003 Shedroff, N. (2009). Experience Design 1.1. En Nathan Shedroff. Experience Design Books Silveira-Maia, M., Lopes-dos-Santos, P., Sanches-Ferreira, M., Alves, S., & Silveira-Maia, C. (2019). The use of the international classification of functioning, disability and health in an interactive perspective: the assessment and intervention of students’ additional support needs in Portugal. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41(25), 3016-3024. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1483433 Singh, B. P., & Das, U. D. (2020). Some Statistical Properties of a Weighted Distribution and Its Application to Waiting Time Data. Asian Journal of Probability and Statistics, 9(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajpas/2020/v9i130216 Sistema Integrado de Información de la Protección Social – SISPRO. (2020). Observatorio Discapacidad. http://rssvr2.sispro.gov.co/ObservatorioDiscapacidad/ Span, M., Smits, C., Groen-van de ven, L., Jukema, J., Hettinga, M., Cremers, A., VernooijDassen, M., & Eefsting, J. (2014). Towards an interactive web tool that supports shared 156 decision making in dementia: Identifying user requirements. International Journal on Advances in Life Sciences, 6(3-4), 338-349. Story, M. F. (1998). Maximizing Usability: The Principles of Universal Design. Assistive Technology, 10(1), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1998.10131955 Suchman, L. (2002). Located Accountabilities in Technology Production. Scand. J. Inf. Syst., 14(2), 91–105. Sushil. (2012). Interpreting the Interpretive Structural Model. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 13(2), 87-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-012-0008-3 Taffe, S. (2015). The hybrid designer/end-user: Revealing paradoxes in co-design. Design Studies, 40, 39-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.06.003 Tamayo y Tamayo, M. (2011). La interdisciplinariedad [Interdisciplinarity]. Cartillas para el Docente ICESI; No.12, 18. Timmins, ., O’rourke, P., Bagnasco, A., Timmins, B., Ekins, R., Long, ., Aleo, ., & asso, L. (2017). Using videoed workshops in interdisciplinary research with people who have disabilities. Nurse Researcher, 25(2), 24-28. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2017.e1481 Tsatsou, P. (2020). Is digital inclusion fighting disability stigma? Opportunities, barriers, and recommendations. Disability & Society, 0(0), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1749563 Velarde Lizama, V. (2016). Los modelos de la discapacidad: un recorrido histórico [The models of disability: a historical journey.]. Revista empresa y humanismo, XV(1), 115-136. Verza, R., Carvalho, M. L. L., Battaglia, M. A., & Uccelli, M. M. (2006). An interdisciplinary approach to evaluating the need for assistive technology reduces equipment abandonment. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 12(1), 88-93. https://doi.org/10.1191/1352458506ms1233oa Vinodh, S., Ramesh, K., & Arun, C. S. (2016). Application of interpretive structural modelling for analysing the factors influencing integrated lean sustainable system. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 18(2), 413-428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-1025-7 Waldschmidt, A., Berressem, H., & Ingwersen, M. (2017). Culture-theory-disability: Encounters between disability studies and cultural studies. En A. Waldschmidt, H. Berressem, & M. Ingwersen (Eds.), Culture - Theory - Disability. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839425336 Warfield, J. N. (1974a). Developing Subsystem Matrices in Structural Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-4(1), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1974.5408523 Warfield, J. N. (1974b). Toward Interpretation of Complex Structural Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 4(5), 405-417. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1974.4309336 Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press. Waters, R. L., Adkins, R. H., & Yakura, J. S. (1991). Definition of complete spinal cord injury. Paraplegia, 29(9), 573-581. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.1991.85 Wittich, W., Granberg, S., Wahlqvist, M., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., & Mäki-Torkko, E. (2021). Device abandonment in deafblindness: a scoping review of the intersection of functionality and usability through the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health lens. BMJ Open, 11(1), e044873. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044873 Woodbury, E. Z. (2013). Auto-mobile: Disabled Drivers in New Zealand (Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy). University of Otago. World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability World Health Organization. (2018). Disability and rehabilitation Global Cooperation on Assistive Technology (GATE). World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/phi/implementation/assistive_technology/phi_gate/en/ Yen, W.-T., Flinn, S. R., Sommerich, C. M., Lavender, S. A., & Sanders, E. B.-N. (2013). Preference of lid design characteristics by older adults with limited hand function. Journal of Hand Therapy, 26(3), 261-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2013.04.002 Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method in Evaluation Research. Evaluation Practice, 15(3), 283-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500309 Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Reserach - Design and Methods. En SAGE (Vol. 5). Zamenopoulos, T., & Katerina, A. (2018). Co-Design as Collaborative Research. En Connected Communities Foundation Series Zhang, Z., Guo, C., & Martinez, L. (2017). Managing Multigranular Linguistic Distribution Assessments in Large-Scale Multiattribute Group Decision Making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 47(11), 3063-3076. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2016.2560521
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_14cb
eu_rights_str_mv	closedAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_14cb
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv	application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv	Facultad de Artes y Humanidades Manizales Doctorado en Diseño y Creación
publisher.none.fl_str_mv	Facultad de Artes y Humanidades Manizales Doctorado en Diseño y Creación
institution	Universidad de Caldas
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_	1836145085720297472
spelling	Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudioMultidisciplinary co-exploration in the pre-design phase of assistive technologies. A case studyDiseñoTecnologíaCo-exploraciónMultidisciplinarioDiscapacidadSentido colectivoCo-diseñoCo-explorationMultidisciplinaryDisabilityCollective senseCo-designIlustraciones, gráficas, fotografíasspa:Esta investigación tiene como objetivo caracterizar la co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño, la cual favorece la toma de decisiones en la identificación de problemas orientados al desarrollo de tecnologías de apoyo para discapacidad motora, al establecer la forma como se construye el sentido colectivo centrado en siete participantes de diferentes disciplinas (medicina, psicología, ingeniería y diseño), el usuario, un interesado y el investigador. La metodología propuesta es de tipo cualitativo - interpretativo con perspectiva narrativa de tópicos, puesto que la intención es analizar el grado de interacción del grupo a través de un proceso de co-diseño. Para describir esas formas intersubjetivas en la toma de decisiones para la identificación de problemas de una persona en situación de discapacidad motora, se diseñó un estudio de tres etapas. La primera, recurrió a la recolección de datos por medio de sondas culturales para explorar cómo se relacionan los saberes y experiencias que se manifiestan en la fase de prediseño. En la segunda, se propuso situar esos saberes y experiencias hacia una construcción de sentido colectivo representado por ideas colectivas resultado de los espacios de co-diseño. Para la última etapa, se implementó un cuestionario con y para el grupo en donde los participantes interpretan las categorías de observación para definir los criterios de diseño que orienta la continuidad del proceso de co-diseño hacia el desarrollo de una tecnología de apoyo que satisfaga las necesidades identificadas desde la persona en situación de discapacidad motora. En tal sentido, una de las conclusiones que sobresale es el grado de contribución equivalente por cada participante en la identificación del problema de diseño, fundamentada por el proceso de co-exploración que se trasformó desde un estado multidisciplinar a un estado interdisciplinar como grupo de diseño.eng:This research aims to characterize a multidisciplinary co-exploration in the pre-design phase, which enhances decision-making in problem identification oriented to the development of assistive technologies for motor disabilities, establishing how the collective sense is constructed by seven participants from different disciplines (medicine, psychology, engineering and design), a user, a stakeholder and the researcher. The proposed methodology is qualitative-interpretative with a topical narrative perspective, since the intention is to analyze the degree of group interaction through a co-design process. A three-stage study was designed to describe these intersubjective forms in the decision-making process for the identification of problems of a person with motor disabilities. The first, resorted to data collection by means of cultural probes to explore how the knowledge and experiences that are manifested in the pre-design phase are related. In the second, it was proposed to map knowledge and experiences towards a construction of collective sense represented by collective ideas resulting from the co-design spaces. For the last stage, a survey was implemented with and for the group where the participants interpret the categories of observation to define the design criteria, which guides the continuity of the co-design process towards the development of an assistive technology that meets the needs identified from the person with motor disabilities. In conclusion, the degree of contribution is equivalent for each participant in the identification of the design problem, based on the process of co-exploration that was transformed from a multidisciplinary state to an interdisciplinary state as a design group.Resumen/ Abstract / Introducción/ Problemática / Planteamiento del problema/ Objetivos de investigación/ Objetivo general/ Objetivos específicos/ Pregunta de investigación / Pregunta auxiliar/ Hipótesis / Conceptos clave / 1. Revisión de la literatura / 1.1. Reconociendo la discapacidad/ 1.2. Hacia una accesibilidad tecnológica/1.3. La extensión del modelo biopsicosocial con tecnología / 1.4. La experiencia como unidad holística / 1.5. Diseño participativo para las tecnologías de apoyo/ 1.5.1. La práctica del co-diseño/ 1.5.2. Procesos de diseño vinculando usuarios / 1.5.3. La co-exploración en el prediseño/ 1.6. Un enfoque multidisciplinar para la co-exploración / 1.7. Enfoques de -inter- y -trans- disciplinar/ 1.8. Aproximaciones similares en la literatura/ 2. Metodología / 2.1. Descripción del caso de estudio/ 2.1.1. Participantes / 2.1.2. Área del conocimiento en medicina/ 2.1.3. Área del conocimiento en psicología/ 2.1.4. Área del conocimiento en ingeniería / 2.1.5. Área del conocimiento en diseño / 2.1.6. Interesado: Compañero de clase / 2.1.7. Persona-usuario/ 2.2. Selección de caso de estudio/ 2.3. Consideraciones éticas/ 2.3.1. Procedimiento / 2.4. Diseño de la investigación/ 2.5. Recolección de datos / 2.6. Análisis de datos/ 2.7. Procedimiento / 2.7.1. Contextualizando / 2.7.2. Comprendiendo/ 2.7.3. Matriz de auto-interacción estructural / 2.7.4. Matriz de alcanzabilidad / 2.7.5. Partición por niveles/ 2.7.6. Grafo direccional/ 2.7.7. Clasificación por sectores basado en MICMAC/ 2.7.8. Interpretando/ 3. Resultados / 3.1. Lineamientos metodológicos / 3.1.1. Lineamiento Reglas: el conflictos y toma de decisiones/ 3.1.2. Lineamiento Sujeto: conformación de grupo multidisciplinar/ 3.1.3. Lineamiento Comunidad: personas-usuarios con discapacidad e interesados/ 3.1.4. Lineamiento División del trabajo: definición de roles / 3.1.5. Lineamiento Artefacto mediador: sondas culturales / 3.1.6. Lineamiento Objeto: sentido colectivo/ 3.1.7. Relaciones entre lineamientos/ 3.2. Hallazgos / 4. Discusión/ 4.1. Las perspectivas parciales hacia la objetividad desde un conocimiento colectivo /4.2. Construcción de sentido colectivo a partir del diálogo de saberes/ 4.3. Procesos en la toma de decisiones desde la colectividad/ 4.4. Retos y dificultades/ 4.5. Perspectivas posteriores al prediseño / 4.5.1. Reactivación de la mano no dominante / 4.6. Abandono del prototipo en la mano dominante / 4.7. Contribuciones del proyecto de investigación/ 4.8. Contribuciones como difusión del conocimiento/ 5. Conclusiones y futuras investigaciones / 5.1. La construcción de sentido colectivo multidisciplinario/ 5.2. La definición colectiva interdisciplinaria de criterios de diseño / 5.3. Invitación a futuras investigaciones/ Referencias / ANEXOS .DoctoradoEsta tesis fue financiada de forma parcial por la Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, por medio de la comisión de estudios con descarga académica y apoyo económico.Doctor(a) en Diseño y CreaciónDiseño y Desarrollo de Productos InteractivosFacultad de Artes y HumanidadesManizalesDoctorado en Diseño y CreaciónGallego Gómez, Juan DiegoDICOVI: Diseño y Cognición en Entornos Visuales y Virtuales (Categoría A1)Quintero Guerrero, Christian David2022-02-09T21:58:12Z2022-02-09T21:58:12Z2022-03-01Trabajo de grado - Doctoradohttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06Textinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesishttps://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TDhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85application/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/handle/ucaldas/17388Universidad de CaldasRepositorio institucional Universidad de Caldashttps://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/engspaAgredo-Delgado, V., Ruiz Melenje, P. H., Collazos, C. A., Moreira, F., & Fardoune, H. M. (2020). Catálogo de lineamientos metodológicos para apoyar el proceso de aprendizaje colaborativo. Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS), 21, 16. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.22204Agree, E. M., & Freedman, V. A. (2003). A Comparison of Assistive Technology and Personal Care in Alleviating Disability and Unmet Need. The Gerontologist, 43(3), 335-344. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/43.3.335Ahmadvand, A., Gatchel, R., Brownstein, J., & Nissen, L. (2018). The Biopsychosocial-Digital Approach to Health and Disease: Call for a Paradigm Expansion. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(5), e189. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9732Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press.Angelini, L., Carrino, S., Abou Khaled, O., Riva-Mossman, S., & Mugellini, E. (2016). Senior Living Lab: An Ecological Approach to Foster Social Innovation in an Ageing Society. Future Internet, 8(4), 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi8040050Arango Morales, X. A., & Cuevas Pérez, V. A. (2015). Método de análisis estructural: matriz de impactos cruzados multiplicación aplicada a una clasificación (Micmac). Métodos y técnicas cualitativas y cuantitativas aplicables a la investigación en ciencias sociale, 165- 233Arlati, S., Spoladore, D., Mottura, S., Zangiacomi, A., Ferrigno, G., Sacchetti, R., & Sacco, M. (2019). Analysis for the design of a novel integrated framework for the return to work of wheelchair users. Work, 61(4), 603-625. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-182829Arnau Ripollés, M. S., & Toboso Martín, M. (2008). La discapacidad dentro del enfoque de capacidades y funcionamientos de Amartya en [Disability within Amartya en’s capabilities and operations approach]. Araucaria. Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofía, Política y Humanidades, Año 10(20), 64-94.Aryana, B., Brewster, L., & Nocera, J. A. (2019). Design for mobile mental health: an exploratory review. Health and Technology, 9(4), 401-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-018-0271- 1Ashby, W. R. (1991). Requisite Variety and Its Implications for the Control of Complex Systems. En Facets of Systems Science (pp. 405-417). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 4899-0718-9_28Atlas.ti. (2018). Atlas.ti scientific software development GmbH: Qualitative data analysis.Bacha, J. A. (2017). Mapping Use, Storytelling, and Experience Design. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(2), 198-228. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651917746708Bahler, D., Dupont, C., & Bowen, J. (1995). Mixed quantitative/qualitative method for evaluating compromise solutions to conflicts in collaborative design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 9(4), 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400002869Barbosa Ardila, S. D., Villegas Salazar, F., & Beltrán, J. (2020). El modelo médico como generador de discapacidad. Revista Latinoamericana de Bioética, 19(37-2), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.18359/rlbi.4303Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies (Annette Lavers, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang, 137.Benktzon, M. (1993). Designing for our future selves: the Swedish experience. Applied Ergonomics, 24(1), 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(93)90155-3Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Group.Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., & Ståhlbrost, A. (2008). Participatory design: one step back or two steps forward? Proceedings of the tenth anniversary conference on participatory design 2008, 102-111Biddiss, E., McPherson, A., Shea, G., & McKeever, P. (2013). The Design and Testing of Interactive Hospital Spaces to Meet the Needs of Waiting Children. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 6(3), 49-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/193758671300600305Bixler, A. (2010). Accessibility Through Design. Occupational health & safety (Waco, Tex.), 79(9), 22-24Brandt, E., Binder, T., & Sanders, E. B. N. (2012). Tools and techniques: Ways to engage telling, making and enacting. En J. Simonsen & T. Robertson (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. RoutledgeBratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. (2014). Disentangling Participation. En R. Harper (Ed.), Disentangling participation; Power and Decision-making in participatory design. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06163-4Bratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. (2016). What is a participatory design result? Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference on Full papers - PDC ’16, 1, 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1145/2940299.2940316Burgstahler, . (200 ). Universal Design : Process , Principles , and Applications. DO-IT.Burkhardt, S. (2014). Biopsychosocial Approaches to Understanding Disability: Building Connections: How Teachers Matter. En Special Education International Perspectives: Biopsychosocial, Cultural, and Disability Aspects (Vol. 27, pp. 3-32). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0270-401320140000027001Campbell, J., & Moyers, B. (1991). The Power of Myth. Anchor Books.Castaneda, L. (2018). A Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde (CIF) – um caminho para a Promoção da Saúde. Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance, 20(2), 229-233. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980- 0037.2018v20n2p229Claes, C., van Hove, G., Vandevelde, S., van Loon, J., & Schalock, R. L. (2010). Person-centered planning: Analysis of research and effectiveness. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(6), 432-453. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-48.6.432Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T., & Roberts, B. (1976). Subcultures, Cultures and Class: A theoretical overview. En Resistance Through Rituals (pp. 9-74). Routledge.Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. En G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed Cognitions Psychological and Educational Considerations (pp. 23-74). Cambridge University PressCollazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J. A., & Ochoa, S. F. (2003). Collaborative Scenarios to Promote Positive Interdependence among Group Members. En Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 2806, pp. 356-370). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540- 39850-9_30Collazos, C. A., Padilla-zea, N., Pozzi, F., Guerrero, L. A., Gutierrez, F. L., Collazos, C. A., Padillazea, N., Pozzi, F., & Guerrero, L. A. (2014). Design guidelines to foster cooperation in digital environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(3), 375-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2014.943277Cooper, A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2007). About Face 3: The essentials of interaction design. En Wiley Publishing, Inc. (3.a ed.). Wiley.Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153Cortés, E., & Cru , A. (201 ). enerative Design as Tool for ocial nnovation : A Methodological Approach. Back to the Future [icdhs 10th + 1 Conference] Proceedings Book, October, 44-48.Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Third Edition. En Sage (Vol. 66). SAGE Publications, Inc.Dawood, I., & Underwood, J. (2010). Prioritising Variables of SMEs / Private Sector through Interpretive Structural Model ( ISM ). TG65 & W065 - Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, 146-160De Couvreur, L., & oossens, R. (2011). Design for (every)one : co-creation as a bridge between universal design and rehabilitation engineering. CoDesign, 7(2), 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.609890De Macedo Guimarães, L. B. (2012). Sociotechnical design for a sustainable world. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 13(2), 240-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2011.641230De Saussure, F. (1966). Course in general linguistics, Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye in Collaboration With Albert Riedlinger. Translated, With an Introd. and Notes by Wade Baskin. McGraw-HillDebrah, Ralitsa D., de la Harpe, R., & M’Rithaa, M. K. (2017). Design probes and toolkits for healthcare: Identifying information needs in African communities through service design. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S2120-S2134. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352730Debrah, Ralitsa Diana, de la Harpe, R., & M’Rithaa, M. K. (201 ). Exploring design strategies to determine information needs of caregivers. 7th International DEFSA Conference Proceedings, 67-77. https://doi.org/978-1-77012-137-9Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The «what» and «why» of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01Desmet, P., & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57-66.Díaz Velázquez, E. (2009). Reflexiones epistemológicas para una sociología de la discapacidad. Intersticios. Revista sociológica de pensamiento crítico, 3(2), 85-98.Dugstad, J., Eide, T., Nilsen, E. R., & Eide, H. (2019). Towards successful digital transformation through co-creation: a longitudinal study of a four-year implementation of digital monitoring technology in residential care for persons with dementia. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 366. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4191-1Elbers, S., van Gessel, C., Renes, R. J., van der Lugt, R., Wittink, H., & Hermsen, S. (2021). Innovation in Pain Rehabilitation Using Co-Design Methods During the Development of a 147 Relapse Prevention Intervention: Case Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(1), e18462. https://doi.org/10.2196/18462Engel, G. (1977). The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129-136. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.847460Engeström, Y. (1990). Learning, working and imagining : twelve studies in activity theory. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. En Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 377-404). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.025Federici, S., Meloni, F., & Borsci, S. (2016). The abandonment of assistive technology in Italy: a survey of National Health Service users. European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 52(4), 516-526Findeli, A., Brouillet, D., Martin, S., Moineau, C., & Tarrago, R. (2008). Research Through Design and Transdisciplinarity: A Tentative Contribution to the Methodology of Design Research. En «FOCUSED» — Current Design Research Projects and Methods Swiss Design Network Symposium (pp. 67-91).Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1988). Disability Beyond Stigma: Social Interaction, Discrimination, and Activism. Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4560.1988.tb02045.xFrancis, P., Mellor, D., & Firth, L. (2009). Techniques and Recommendations for the Inclusion of Users with Autism in the Design of Assistive Technologies. Assistive Technology, 21(2), 57-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400430902945561Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7Friedman, B., Hendry, D. G., & Borning, A. (2017). A Survey of Value Sensitive Design Methods. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, 11(2), 63-125. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000015Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Borning, A., & Huldtgren, A. (2013). Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. En interactions (Vol. 3, Número 6, pp. 55-95). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4García-Acosta, G., Lange-Morales, K., Puentes Lagos, D. E., & Ruiz Ortiz, M. R. (2011). Addressing human factors and ergonomics in design process, product life cycle, and innovation: Trends in consumer product design. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design: Methods and Techniques, 133-154.García, V., Rubio, M., & García, G. (2007). Trauma Raquimedular. MEDICRIT Revista de Medicina Crítica, 4(3), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.5413/mrmc.2007.43.89Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1145/291224.291235Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. SAGE Publications.Gibson, C. B. (2001). From knowledge accumulation to accommodation: cycles of collective cognition in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.84Godet, M. (1986). Introduction to la prospective. Futures, 18(2), 134-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(86)90094-7reenhalgh, T., haw, ., Wherton, J., Hughes, ., Lynch, J., A’Court, C., Hinder, ., ahy, N., Byrne, E., Finlayson, A., Sorell, T., Procter, R., & Stones, R. (2016). SCALS: a fourthgeneration study of assisted living technologies in their organisational, social, political and policy context. BMJ Open, 6(2), e010208. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010208Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). Controversias paradigmáticas, contradicciones y confluencias emergentes. En Paradigmas y perspectivas en disputa. Manual de investigación cualitativa.: Vol. II (pp. 38-78). Editorial Gedisa, S.A.Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: A comparative studyHaraway, D. (2013). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. En Women, Science, and Technology (Vol. 3, Número 3, pp. 489- 506). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203427415-40Hassenzahl, M. (2010). Experience Design: Technology for All the Right Reasons. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3(1), 1-95. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00261ED1V01Y201003HCI008Hassenzahl, M., Eckoldt, K., Diefenbach, S., Laschke, M., Lenz, E., & Kim, J. (2013). Designing moments of meaning and pleasure. Experience design and happiness. International Journal of Design, 7(3), 21-31.Hernández, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw-Hill Interamericana editores.Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, M. del P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6.a ed.). McGraw-Hill.Howard, J., Fisher, Z., Kemp, A. H., Lindsay, S., Tasker, L. H., & Tree, J. J. (2020). Exploring the barriers to using assistive technology for individuals with chronic conditions: a metasynthesis review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1788181Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687Imrie, R. (2004). Demystifying disability: a review of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Sociology of Health & iIlness, 26(3), 287-305. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2004.00391.xISO. (2016). ISO - ISO 13485 — Medical devices. https://www.iso.org/iso-13485-medicaldevices.htmlJiménez Lara, A. (2007). Conceptos y tipologías de la discapacidad. Documentos y normativas de clasificación más relevantes. En R. de Lorenzo & L. Pérez, Cayo (Eds.), Tratado sobre discapacidad (Aranzadi, pp. 177-205)John, C. (2015). What is co-design? \| Design for Europe. Design for Europe. http://designforeurope.eu/what-co-designJones, J., & Pal, J. (2015). Counteracting Dampeners: Understanding technologyamplified capabilities of people with disabilities in Sierra Leone. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 15, 6:1--6:10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2737856.2738025Jones, P. (2018). Contexts of Co-creation: Designing with System Stakeholders (pp. 3-52). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55639-8_1Jones, P. H. (2014). Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems. En G. S. Metcalf (Ed.), Social Systems and Design (pp. 91-128). Springer Japan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54478-4_4Kalpokaite, N., & Radivojevic, I. (2019). Best Practice Article: Analyzing Code Frequencies with ATLAS.ti 8 Windows & Mac: The Code-Document Table. https://atlasti.com/2019/01/11/analyzing-code-frequencies-with-atlas-ti-8-windows-macthe-code-document-table/Karadayi-Usta, S. (2020). An Interpretive Structural Analysis for Industry 4.0 Adoption Challenges. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 973-978. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2018.2890443Kinnear, T. C., & Taylor, J. W. (1989). Investigación de mercados: un enfoque aplicado. McGrawHill.Kleinsmann, M. S. (2006). Understanding collaborative design. Delft University of Technology.Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or on the Proposition That «Design Is Making Sense (Of Things)». Design Issues, 5(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511512Larsson Ranada, Å., & Lidström, H. (2019). Satisfaction with assistive technology device in relation to the service delivery process—A systematic review. Assistive Technology, 31(2), 82-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2017.1367737Lee, Y. (2008). Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the codesign process. CoDesign, 4(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875613Li, G., Kou, G., & Peng, Y. (2018). A Group Decision Making Model for Integrating Heterogeneous Information. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 48(6), 982- 992. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2016.2627050Li, J., Zhang, J., Ge, W., & Liu, X. (2004). Multi-scale methodology for complex systems. Chemical Engineering Science, 59(8-9), 1687-1700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2004.01.025Luborsky, M. R. (1993). Sociocultural Factors Shaping Technology Usage: Fulfilling the Promise. Technology and disability, 2(1), 71-78. https://doi.org/10.3233/TAD-1993-2110Lyle O’Brien, C., O’Brien, J., & Mount, B. (1 7). Person-Centered Planning Has Arrived … or Has It? Mental Retardation, 35(6), 480-484. https://doi.org/10.1352/0047- 6765(1997)035<0480:PPHAOH>2.0.CO;2Maldonado, S. (2005). ¿Exclusión o discriminación?: el caso de las personas con discapacidad en el mercado laboral peruano. Observatorio de la Economía Latinoamericana, 3, 47.Malinverni, L., Schaper, M.-M., & Pares, N. (2019). Multimodal methodological approach for participatory design of Full-Body Interaction Learning Environments. Qualitative Research, 19(1), 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118773299Mansell, J., & Beadle-Brown, J. (2004). Person-centred planning or person-centred action? A response to the commentaries. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2004.00176.xManzini, E. (2015a). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. En MIT press. The MIT PressManzini, E. (2015b). Design in the transition phase: a new design culture for the emerging design. Design Philosophy Papers, 13(1), 57-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14487136.2015.1085683Margolin, V. (2007). Design for development: towards a history. Design Studies, 28(2), 111-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2006.11.008Margolin, V., & Margolin, S. (2002). A «Social Model» of Design: Issues of Practice and Research. Design Issues, 18(4).Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Design Probes. University of Art and Design Helsinki.Mattelmäki, T. (2008). Probing for co-exploring. CoDesign, 4(1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875027Max-Neef, M. A. (2005). Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological Economics, 53(1), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014McCarthy, J., & Wright, P. (2004). Technology as experience. interactions, 11(5), 42. https://doi.org/10.1145/1015530.1015549McCarthy, J., Wright, P., Wallace, J., & Dearden, A. (2006). The experience of enchantment in human–computer interaction. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(6), 369-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-005-0055-2McLellan, H. (2000). Experience Design. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493100316238Meskó, B., Radó, N., & yőrffy, Z. (201 ). Opinion leader empowered patients about the era of digital health: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 9(3), e025267. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025267Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 710-720. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021- 9010.75.6.710Michener, W. K., Allard, S., Budden, A., Cook, R. B., Douglass, K., Frame, M., Kelling, S., Koskela, R., Tenopir, C., & Vieglais, D. A. (2012). Participatory design of DataONE—Enabling cyberinfrastructure for the biological and environmental sciences. Ecological Informatics, 11, 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2011.08.007Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. (2020). DisCAPACIDAD. https://www.minsalud.gov.co/proteccionsocial/Paginas/DisCAPACIDAD.aspxMoran, J. (2002). Interdisciplinarity (1.a ed.). Routledge.Moreno, J. L., & Jennings, H. H. (1938). Statistics of Social Configurations. Sociometry, 1(3/4), 342. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785588Mosleh, W. S., & Larsen, H. (2020). Exploring the complexity of participation. CoDesign, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1789172Murphy, R., & Jones, P. (2020). Leverage analysis. FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 13(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.3384Naciones Unidas Asamblea. (2006). Convención sobre los derechos de las personas con discapacidad. En Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas (pp. 1-30). Naciones Unidas AsambleaNasr, N., Leon, B., Mountain, G., Nijenhuis, S. M., Prange, G., Sale, P., & Amirabdollahian, F. (2016). The experience of living with stroke and using technology: opportunities to engage and co-design with end users. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(8), 653-660. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2015.1036469Newman, M. E. J. (2011). Complex Systems: A Survey. American Journal of Physics, 79(8), 800- 810. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3590372Nielsen, J. (1992). The usability engineering life cycle. Computer, 25(3), 12-22. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.121503Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. En Basic Books (Número 1). Basic Books.Norman, D. A., & Stappers, P. J. (2015). DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(2), 83-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002Norman, D., & Draper, S. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on HumanComputer Interaction.Oliva, R. (2004). Model structure analysis through graph theory: partition heuristics and feedback structure decomposition. System Dynamics Review, 20(4), 313-336. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.298OMS. (2001). Clasificación Internacional del Funcionamiento, de la Discapacidad y de la Salud. Publicaciones de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, 1-288. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pep.0000245823.21888.71Oosterlaken, I. (2009). Design for Development: A Capability Approach. Design Issues, 25(4), 91- 102. https://doi.org/10.1162/desi.2009.25.4.91Oosterlaken, I., & Hoven, J. van den. (2012). The Capability Approach, Technology and Design (Vol. 5). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3879-9Opsahl, T., Agneessens, F., & Skvoretz, J. (2010). Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Networks, 32(3), 245-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2010.03.006Ottino, J. M. (2003). Complex systems. AIChE Journal, 49(2), 292-299. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690490202Papanek, V. (1985). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change (2.a ed.). Thames & Hudson Ltd.Patil, G. P. (2014). Weighted Distributions. En Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online (pp. 1- 11). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat07359Pérez Dalmeda, M. E., & Chhabra, G. (2019). Modelos teóricos de discapacidad: un seguimiento del desarrollo histórico del concepto de discapacidad en las últimas cinco décadas. Revista Española de Discapacidad, 7(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.5569/2340- 5104.07.01.01Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2015). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(4), 505-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0358-zPfisterer, K. J., Boger, J., & Wong, A. (2019). Prototyping the Automated Food Imaging and Nutrient Intake Tracking System: Modified Participatory Iterative Design Sprint. JMIR Human Factors, 6(2), e13017. https://doi.org/10.2196/13017Phillips, B., & Zhao, H. (1993). Predictors of Assistive Technology Abandonment. Assistive Technology, 5(1), 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1993.10132205Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard business review, 76(4), 97-105Pirkl, J. J. (1 ). Transgenerational design : products for an aging population.Press, M., & Cooper, R. (2003). The Design Experience. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315240329Pressman, R. S. (2005). Software engineering: a practitioner’s approach (7.a ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.Quintero, C. (2020). A review: accessible technology through participatory design. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1785564Quintero, C., & Gallego, J. (2020). Interdisciplinary Co-Design Process of Assistive Technology in Value Elicitation. 9th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3439231.3439234Rade, K. A., Pharande, V. A., & Saini, D. R. (2017). Interpretive Structural Modeling ( ISM ) for Recovery of Heat Energy. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 12(1), 83-92.Riemer-Reiss, M. L., & Wacker, R. R. (2000). Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66(3), 44-50.Rios, A., Miguel Cruz, A., Guarín, M. R., & Caycedo Villarraga, P. S. (2014). What factors are associated with the provision of assistive technologies: the Bogotá D.C. case. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 9(5), 432-444. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2014.936053Robertson, T., & Wagner, I. (2013). Ethics: engagement, representation and politics-in-action. En Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design (pp. 84-105). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203108543-11Rodríguez Díaz, S., & Ferreira, M. A. V. (2010). Desde la dis-capacidad hacia la diversidad funcional. Un ejercicio de dis-normalización. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 68(2), 289-309. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2008.05.22Ruiz, M. B. R., & Díaz, A. L. A. (2003). ESTRATEGIAS DE AFRONTAMIENTO Y PROCESO DE ADAPTACIÓN A LA LESIÓN MEDULARRyan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020Said Valbuena B, W., Montoya Carvajal, A., & Fernanda Pinzon, L. (2020). From a ludic Loom of Ideas to the Spiral of Intercultural Co-creation. Proceedings of the 16th Participatory Design Conference 2020 - Participation(s) Otherwise - Volume 1, 1, 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1145/3385010.3385022Salcedo, A. S. (2006). PONENCIA XV JORNADAS EUBD. Tecnología de apoyo y sociedad de la información. Proyectos europeos. Revista General de Información y Documentación, 16(1), 51-63.Sanders, E. B.-N. (2000). Generative Tools for Co-designing. En S. A. R. Scrivener, L. J. Ball, & A. Woodcock (Eds.), Collaborative Design (pp. 3-12). Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0779-8_1Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2014). Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning. CoDesign, 10(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2014.888183Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068Santi, M. F. (2015). Vulnerabilidad y ética de la investigación social: perspectivas actuales. Revista Latinoamericana de Bioética, 15(29-2), 52. https://doi.org/10.18359/rlbi.535Sarmiento Pelayo, M. P. (2015). Co-design: A central approach to the inclusion of people with disabilities. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina, 63, 149-154. https://doi.org/10.15446/revfacmed.v63n3sup.49345Scaife, M., Rogers, Y., Aldrich, F., & Davies, M. (1997). Designing for or designing with? Informant design for interactive learning environments. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems, 343-350. https://doi.org/10.1145/258549.258789Scherer, M. J. (1996). Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disability and Rehabilitation, 18(9), 439-448. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289609165907Scherer, M. J. (2015). Assistive Technology and Persons With Disabilities. En M. A. Stebnicki & I. Marini (Eds.), The Professional Counselor’s Desk Reference (pp. 475–481). Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826171825.0074Scherer, M. J. (2020). It is time for the biopsychosocialtech model. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 15(4), 363-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1752319Scherer, M. J., & Lane, J. P. (1 7). Assessing consumer profiles of ‘ideal’ assistive technologies in ten categories: An integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(12), 528-535. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289709166046Schwarzkopf, E. (2013). Accessibility Through Design.Sharma, V., Grover, S., & Sharma, S. K. (2017). Analyzing the barriers affecting the effective utilization of quality tools and techniques using integrated ISM approach. Management Science Letters, 7(11), 525-540. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2017.8.003Shedroff, N. (2009). Experience Design 1.1. En Nathan Shedroff. Experience Design BooksSilveira-Maia, M., Lopes-dos-Santos, P., Sanches-Ferreira, M., Alves, S., & Silveira-Maia, C. (2019). The use of the international classification of functioning, disability and health in an interactive perspective: the assessment and intervention of students’ additional support needs in Portugal. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41(25), 3016-3024. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1483433Singh, B. P., & Das, U. D. (2020). Some Statistical Properties of a Weighted Distribution and Its Application to Waiting Time Data. Asian Journal of Probability and Statistics, 9(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajpas/2020/v9i130216Sistema Integrado de Información de la Protección Social – SISPRO. (2020). Observatorio Discapacidad. http://rssvr2.sispro.gov.co/ObservatorioDiscapacidad/Span, M., Smits, C., Groen-van de ven, L., Jukema, J., Hettinga, M., Cremers, A., VernooijDassen, M., & Eefsting, J. (2014). Towards an interactive web tool that supports shared 156 decision making in dementia: Identifying user requirements. International Journal on Advances in Life Sciences, 6(3-4), 338-349.Story, M. F. (1998). Maximizing Usability: The Principles of Universal Design. Assistive Technology, 10(1), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1998.10131955Suchman, L. (2002). Located Accountabilities in Technology Production. Scand. J. Inf. Syst., 14(2), 91–105.Sushil. (2012). Interpreting the Interpretive Structural Model. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 13(2), 87-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-012-0008-3Taffe, S. (2015). The hybrid designer/end-user: Revealing paradoxes in co-design. Design Studies, 40, 39-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.06.003Tamayo y Tamayo, M. (2011). La interdisciplinariedad [Interdisciplinarity]. Cartillas para el Docente ICESI; No.12, 18.Timmins, ., O’rourke, P., Bagnasco, A., Timmins, B., Ekins, R., Long, ., Aleo, ., & asso, L. (2017). Using videoed workshops in interdisciplinary research with people who have disabilities. Nurse Researcher, 25(2), 24-28. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2017.e1481Tsatsou, P. (2020). Is digital inclusion fighting disability stigma? Opportunities, barriers, and recommendations. Disability & Society, 0(0), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1749563Velarde Lizama, V. (2016). Los modelos de la discapacidad: un recorrido histórico [The models of disability: a historical journey.]. Revista empresa y humanismo, XV(1), 115-136.Verza, R., Carvalho, M. L. L., Battaglia, M. A., & Uccelli, M. M. (2006). An interdisciplinary approach to evaluating the need for assistive technology reduces equipment abandonment. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 12(1), 88-93. https://doi.org/10.1191/1352458506ms1233oaVinodh, S., Ramesh, K., & Arun, C. S. (2016). Application of interpretive structural modelling for analysing the factors influencing integrated lean sustainable system. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 18(2), 413-428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-1025-7Waldschmidt, A., Berressem, H., & Ingwersen, M. (2017). Culture-theory-disability: Encounters between disability studies and cultural studies. En A. Waldschmidt, H. Berressem, & M. Ingwersen (Eds.), Culture - Theory - Disability. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839425336Warfield, J. N. (1974a). Developing Subsystem Matrices in Structural Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-4(1), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1974.5408523Warfield, J. N. (1974b). Toward Interpretation of Complex Structural Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 4(5), 405-417. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1974.4309336Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.Waters, R. L., Adkins, R. H., & Yakura, J. S. (1991). Definition of complete spinal cord injury. Paraplegia, 29(9), 573-581. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.1991.85Wittich, W., Granberg, S., Wahlqvist, M., Pichora-Fuller, M. K., & Mäki-Torkko, E. (2021). Device abandonment in deafblindness: a scoping review of the intersection of functionality and usability through the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health lens. BMJ Open, 11(1), e044873. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044873Woodbury, E. Z. (2013). Auto-mobile: Disabled Drivers in New Zealand (Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy). University of Otago.World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disabilityWorld Health Organization. (2018). Disability and rehabilitation Global Cooperation on Assistive Technology (GATE). World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/phi/implementation/assistive_technology/phi_gate/en/Yen, W.-T., Flinn, S. R., Sommerich, C. M., Lavender, S. A., & Sanders, E. B.-N. (2013). Preference of lid design characteristics by older adults with limited hand function. Journal of Hand Therapy, 26(3), 261-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2013.04.002Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the Future of the Case Study. Method in Evaluation Research. Evaluation Practice, 15(3), 283-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500309Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Reserach - Design and Methods. En SAGE (Vol. 5).Zamenopoulos, T., & Katerina, A. (2018). Co-Design as Collaborative Research. En Connected Communities Foundation SeriesZhang, Z., Guo, C., & Martinez, L. (2017). Managing Multigranular Linguistic Distribution Assessments in Large-Scale Multiattribute Group Decision Making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 47(11), 3063-3076. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2016.2560521info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_14cboai:repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co:ucaldas/173882024-07-17T08:10:23Z

Co-exploración multidisciplinaria en la fase de prediseño de tecnologías de apoyo. Un caso de estudio

Publicaciones similares