The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.04 - Oct.-Dec. (2012 vol.11)
pp: 46-54
Kalpana Shankar , University College Dublin
L. Jean Camp , Indiana University, Bloomington
Kay Connelly , Indiana University, Bloomington
Lesa Huber , Indiana University, Bloomington
ABSTRACT
Applications for "aging in place" focus on supporting elders and informing the caregiver but often at the risk of abrogating privacy. The authors developed and tested various prototypes to create a privacy framework for designing home-based computing for seniors.
INDEX TERMS
Privacy, Prototypes, Monitoring, Gerontology, Aging, Medical services, Biomedical monitoring, gerontechnology, pervasive computing, privacy, design
CITATION
Kalpana Shankar, L. Jean Camp, Kay Connelly, Lesa Huber, "Aging, Privacy, and Home-Based Computing: Developing a Design Framework", IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol.11, no. 4, pp. 46-54, Oct.-Dec. 2012, doi:10.1109/MPRV.2011.19
REFERENCES
1. O.A. Blanson Henkemans et al., “Medical Monitoring for Independent Living: User-Centered Design of Smart Home Technologies for Older Adults,” Proc. Med-e-Tel Conf. eHealth, Telemedicine and Health Information and Communication Technologies, Int'l Soc. for Telemedicine & eHealth, 2007, pp. 18–20.
2. S. Warren and L. Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Rev., vol. 4, no. 5, 1890, pp. 193–220.
3. L.F. Cranor, Web Privacy with P3P, O'Reilly, 2002.
4. H. Hochheiser, “The Platform for Privacy Preference as a Social Protocol: An Examination within The U.S. Policy Context,” ACM Trans. Internet Technology, vol. 2 no. 4, 2002, pp. 276–306.
5. A.F. Westin, “Harris-Equifax Consumer Privacy Survey,” Equifax, 2003.
6. K.H. Connelly, A. Khalil, and Y. Liu, “Do I Do What I Say?: Observed versus Stated Privacy Preferences,” Proc. 11th IFIP TC13 Int'l Conf. Human-Computer Interaction (Interact 07), Springer, 2007, pp. 620–623.
7. J.E. Cohen, “A Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at Copyright Management in Cyberspace,” Connecticut Law Rev., vol. 28, no.4, 1996, pp. 981–1039.
8. P. Mell, “Seeking Shade in a Land of Perpetual Sunlight: Privacy as Property in the Electronic Wilderness,” Berkeley Technology Law J., vol. 11, no. 1, 1996, pp. 11–92.
9. A. Odlyzko, “Privacy and Price Discrimination,” Economics of Information Security Camp, Kluwer Academic Press, 2004, pp. 187–21.
10. E.J. Bloustein, “Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity: An Answer to Dean Prosser,” New York Univ. Law Rev., 1968, pp. 962–970.
11. M. Langheinrich, “Privacy Invasions in Ubiquitous Computing,” Ubicomp 2002, Springer, 2002.
12. S. Shapiro, “Places and Space: The Historical Interaction of Technology, Home, and Privacy,” The Information Soc., vol. 14, no. 4, 1998, pp. 275–284.
13. B. Szajna, “Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model,” Management Science, vol. 42, no. 1, 1996, pp. 85–92.
14. S. Beach et al., “Disability, Age, and Information Privacy Attitudes and Quality of Life Technology Applications: Results from a National Web Survey,” ACM Trans. Accessible Computing, vol. 2, no. 1, 2009; http://doi.acm.org/10.11451525840.1525846 .
15. M. Alwan, D. Wiley, and J. Nobel, State of Technology in Aging Services, tech. report, Center for Aging Services Technologies, Nov. 2007.
16. “A Profile of Older Americans,” Administration on Aging, US Dept. Health and Human Services, 2008; www.aoa.gov/AoARoot/Aging_Statistics/Profile/ 2008/docs2008profile.pdf.
17. K.E. Caine et al., “DigiSwitch: A Device to Allow Older Adults to Monitor and Direct the Collection and Transmission of Health Information Collected at Home,” J. Medical Systems, vol. 35, no. 5, 2011, pp. 1181–1195.
18. H. Nissenbaum, “Privacy as Contextual Integrity,” Washington Law Rev., vol. 79, no. 1, 2004, pp. 101–158.
19. L. Little, P. Briggs, and L. Coventry, “Public Space Systems: Designing for Privacy,” Int'l J. Human Computer Studies, vol. 63, nos. 1–2, 2005, pp. 254–268.
20 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool