Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

»Living Labs« als Beispiel für die konzeptionellen Herausforderungen der Integration von Menschen in Technikentwicklung

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Das geteilte Ganze

Zusammenfassung

Die Diskussion wissenschaftlicher Methoden, ihrer theoretischen Grundlagen und Implikationen ist für alle Fachgebiete von zentraler Bedeutung: Wie wissen wir, was wir wissen? Während sich in Disziplinen wie der Philosophie, Soziologie oder den Science and Technology Studies (STS), seit Langem mit dieser Frage beschäftigt wird, um diese so genannten epistemischen Implikationen wissenschaftlicher Arbeit nachzuvollziehen, bleibt der Diskurs über die Annahmen und Folgen von Beteiligung in der Technikentwicklung selbst bisher noch immer im Werden begriffen. Zwar ist die Bedeutung der Teilhabe oder Partizipation von Personen an der Entwicklung zukünftiger Technologien unbestritten und mittlerweile auch in viele Forschungsförderungsprogramme eingeschrieben, unter welchen Bedingungen und mit welchen Folgen diese geschieht, bleibt dabei aber vergleichsweise unterbeleuchtet.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturverzeichnis

  • Asaro, Peter M. 2000: Transforming society by transforming technology: the science and politics of participatory design. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 10(4): 257–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, Eevi. E. 2002: P for political: Participation is not enough. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(1): 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergvall-Kåreborn, Birgitta, Marita Holst, Anna Ståhlbröst. 2009: Concept Design with a Living Lab Approach. In 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10. Waikoloa, Hawaii, USA: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof, Andreas. 2017: Soziale Maschinen bauen: Epistemische Praktiken der Sozialrobotik. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof, Andreas, Juliane Jarke. 2018: Konfigurierung des Alter(n)s: Instanzen der Konstruktion von »älteren Nutzer*innen«; in der Gestaltung von Assistenzsystemen. In Dritte Transdisziplinäre Konferenz »Technische Unterstützungssysteme, die die Menschen wirklich wollen« (TCST 2018), ed. Robert Weidner, Athanasios Karafllidis, 99–106. Hamburg: Helmut-Schmidt-Universität.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof, Andreas, Robert Herms, Maximilian Eibl. 2018a: MERS-MRI – Methodische, ethische, rechtliche und soziale Implikationen für die Mensch-Roboter-Interaktion in Alltagswelten. In Mensch und Computer 2018 – Workshopband, ed. Raimund Dachselt, Gerhard Weber, 647–664. Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof, Andreas, Albrecht Kurze, Sören Totzauer, Michael Storz, Mira Freiermuth, Arne-Berger. 2018b: Living Labs zur Initiierung von Partizipation in der HCI. In Mensch und Computer 2018 – Workshopband, ed. Raimund Dachselt, Gerhard Weber, 655–675. Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bossen, Claus, Rachel C. Smith, Anne M. Kanstrup, Janet McDonnell, Maurizio Teli, Keld Bødker. 2016: Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference, Volume 1. New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, Tone, Ina Wagner. 2016: What is a Participatory Design Result? Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: 141–150. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, Yannick Barthe. 2009: Acting in an uncertain world: an essay on technical democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardullo, Paolo, Rob Kitchin, Cesare Di Feliciantonio. 2018: Living labs and vacancy in the neoliberal city. Cities, 73: 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, John M., Mary B. Rosson, M. 2013: Wild at home: The neighborhood as a living laboratory for HCI. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 20(3): 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Adele. E. 2003: Situational analysis: Grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn. Symbolic interaction, 26(4): 553–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalsgaard, Peter, Kim Halskov, Ole S. Iversen. 2016: Participation Gestalt: Analysing Participatory Qualities of Interaction in Public Space. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 4435–4446. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutilleul, Benoît, Frans A. J. Birrer, Wouter Mensink. 2010: Unpacking european living labs: analysing innovation’s social dimensions. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 4, 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). 2018: Our Labs. https://enoll.org/ Brüssel: ENoLL. Zuletzt aufgerufen: 21.12.2019.

  • Eriksson, Mats, Veli- Pekka Niitamo, Seija Kulkki. 2005: State-of-the-art in utilizing Living Labs approach to user-centric ICT innovation-a European approach. Lulea: Center for Distance-Spanning Technology, Lulea University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, Mats, Veli- Pekka Niitamo, Seija Kulkki, Karl A. Hribernik. 2006: Living labs as a multi-contextual R&D methodology. In 2006 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE), 1–8. Mailand: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, Adam, Luis F. Murillo, Lilly Nguyen, Aaron Panofsky, Christopher Kelty. 2011: Birds of the Internet: Towards a field guide to the organization and governance of participation. Journal of Cultural Economy, 4(2): 157–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Følstad, Astrid. 2008: Living labs for innovation and development of information and communication technology: a literature review. Electronic Journal of Virtual Organisations, 10(Special Issue »Living Labs«): 99–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, Jochen, Grit Laudel. 2004: Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (1. Aufl). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving. 1974: Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, Katharina, Veronica Martinez, Andy Neely. 2018: Co-Creation in Practice: Objectives and Outcomes. Working paper. Cambridge, University of Cambridge: https://cambridgeservicealliance.eng.cam.ac.uk/resources/Downloads/Monthly%20Papers/2018CSASeptemberPaper.pdf. Zuletzt aufgerufen: 21.12.2019

  • Halskov, Kim, Nicolai B. Hansen. 2015: The diversity of participatory design research practice at PDC 2002–2012. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74: 81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Steve, Deborah Tatar, Phoebe Sengers. 2007: The three paradigms of HCI. In Alt. Chi. Session at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–18. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innolab. 2018: Innolab 2018 Dokumentation: Experimentierraum für Gesundheit und Gesellschaft. https://www.innolab-livinglabs.de/. Zuletzt aufgerufen: 21.12.2019. Bochum: Innolab.

  • Kelty, Christopher, Aaron Panofsky, Morgan Currie, Roderic Crooks, Seth Erickson, Patricia Garcia, Michael Wartenbe, Stacy Wood. 2014: Seven dimensions of contemporary participation disentangled. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(3): 474–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Dantec, Christopher A., Sarah Fox. 2015: Strangers at the gate: Gaining access, building rapport, and co-constructing community-based research. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 1348–1358. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefeuvre, Kevin, Sören Totzauer, Andreas Bischof, Albrecht Kurze, Michael Storz, Lisa Ullmann, Arne Berger. 2016: Loaded Dice: Exploring the Design Space of Connected Devices with Blind and Visually Impaired People. In Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, David L. 2008: Snowball Sampling. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, ed. Lisa M. Given, 816–817. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, Janice M., Phyllis Noerager Stern, Juliet Corbin, Barbara Bowers, Kathy Charmaz, Adele E. Clarke. 2009: Developing grounded theory: the second generation. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, I., Velthausz, D., & Kriens, M. (2008): The living labs harmonization cube: Communicating living lab’s essentials. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulvenna, Maurice, Suzanne Martin. 2013: Living Labs: Frameworks and Engagement. In Innovation through Knowledge Transfer 2012, Bd. 18, ed. Robert. J. Howlett, Bogdan Gabrys, Katarzyna Musial-Gabrys, Jim Roach, 135–143. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulvenna, Maurice, Suzanne Martin, Donal McDade, Eileen Beamish, A De Oliveira, Anna Kivilehto. 2011: TRAIL Living Labs Survey 2011: A survey of the ENOLL living labs. Coleraine: University of Ulster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neven, Louis. 2010: ›But obviously not for me‹: robots, laboratories and the defiant identity of elder test users. Sociology of Health & Illness, 32(2): 335–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niitamo, Veli-Pekka, Seija Kulkki, Mats Eriksson, Karl A. Hribernik. 2006: State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs. In 2006 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE), 1–8. Mailand: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogonowski, Corinna, Benedikt Ley, Jan Hess, Lin Wan, Volker Wulf. 2013: Designing for the living room: long-term user involvement in a living lab. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1539–1548. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallot, Marc, Brigitte Trousse, Bernard Senach, Dominique Scapin. 2010: Living lab research landscape: From user centred design and user experience towards user cocreation. In First European Summer School » Living Labs«. Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qaurooni, Danial, Ali Ghazinejad, Inna Kouper, Hamid Ekbia. 2016: Citizens for science and science for citizens: The view from participatory design. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1822–1826. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, Elizabeth B. N., Pieter J. Stappers. 2008: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1): 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuurman, Dimitri, Lieven De Marez, Pieter Ballon. 2015: Living Labs: a systematic literature review. In Open Living Lab Days 2015, Proceedings. Presented at the Open Living Lab Days 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonsen, Jesper, Toni Robertson. 2013: Routledge international handbook of participatory design. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, Lucy. 2007: Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanmeerbeek, Perrine, Lara Vigneron, Pierre Delvenne, Benedikt Rosskamp, Mélanie Antoine. 2015: Involvement of end-users in innovation processes: toward a user-driven approach of innovation. A qualitative analysis of 20 Livings Labs. In Open Living Lab Days 2015, Proceedings. Presented at the Open Living Lab Days 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veeckman, Carina, Dimitri Schuurman, Seppo Leminen, Mika Westerlund. 2013: Linking living lab characteristics and their outcomes: towards a conceptual framework. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(12): 6–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vines, John, Rachel Clarke, Peter Wright, John McCarthy, Patrick Olivier. 2013: Configuring participation: on how we involve people in design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 429–438. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vines, John, Gary Pritchard, Peter Wright, Patrick Olivier, Katie Brittain. 2015: An age-old problem: Examining the discourses of ageing in HCI and strategies for future research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 22(1), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittle, Jon. 2014: How much participation is enough?: a comparison of six participatory design projects in terms of outcomes. In Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference, 121–130. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zandbergen, Dorien. 2017: »We Are Sensemakers«: The (Anti-) politics of Smart City Cocreation. Public Culture 29.3: 539–562, (83).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fakultät für Informatik, Technische Universität Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Deutschland

    Andreas Bischof, Michael Storz, Albrecht Kurze & Arne Berger

  2. Institut für Soziologie, Technische Universität Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Deutschland

    Mira Mariane Freiermuth

Authors
  1. Andreas Bischof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mira Mariane Freiermuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Storz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Albrecht Kurze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Arne Berger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Bischof .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophie & Foresight, Forschungskolleg FoKoS, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany

    Bruno Gransche

  2. Anthropologie und Ethik für Gesundheitsberufe, Evangelische Hochschule Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany

    Arne Manzeschke

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bischof, A., Freiermuth, M.M., Storz, M., Kurze, A., Berger, A. (2020). »Living Labs« als Beispiel für die konzeptionellen Herausforderungen der Integration von Menschen in Technikentwicklung. In: Gransche, B., Manzeschke, A. (eds) Das geteilte Ganze. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26342-3_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26342-3_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-26341-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-26342-3

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation