Converging, Pervasive Technologies: Chronic and Emerging Issues and Policy Adequacy

Assistive Technology

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 126-138

  Seelman, Katherine D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Aging; Assistive technology; Disability; International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; Pervasive computing; Technology convergence; U.S. Office of Technology Assessment

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; HEALTH; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING; TECHNOLOGY; USABILITY ENGINEERING;

AGING; ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; DISABILITY; DISABILITY AND HEALTH; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING; PERVASIVE COMPUTING; TECHNOLOGY CONVERGENCE; U.S. OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT;

ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

ACTION RESEARCH; ARTICLE; ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; COMMUNITY CARE; DECISION MAKING; DISABILITY; HEALTH CARE AVAILABILITY; HEALTH CARE NEED; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH; LAW; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

DISABLED PERSONS; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; SELF-HELP DEVICES; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 54449098570     PISSN: 10400435     EISSN: 19493614     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2008.10131940     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Ackerman, L., Kempf, J., &Miki, T. (2003). Wireless location privacy: Law and policy in the U.S., EU and Japan. ISOC Member Briefing, No. IS. The Internet Society. Retrieved March 2006, from http://www.isoc.orglbriefings/015/index. shtml
2. Baker, P.M.A., & Bellordore, C. (2003). Policy and regulatory assessment: Factors influencing adoption of wireless technologies: Key issues, barriers and opportunities for people with disabilities. Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Mobile Wireless Technologies for Persons with Disabilities, August, 2003 Update. Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.wireless rerc.gatech.edu/news/publication s/PolicyAssessment.doc
3. Bauer, S. M. (2003). Demand pull technology transfer applied to the field of assistive technology. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3/4), 285-303.
4. Benton Found at ion. (2008). Broadcast localism. Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.benton.org
5. Bianchi, G. (2007). Privacy and pervasive computing: Threats and challenges WONS 2007, January 26, 2007.Retrieved February 2008 from
6. http://www.ist-discreet.orglpresentationsl PrivacyPresentation.pdf
7. Blanchard, J. (2004). Ethical considerations of home monitoring technology. Retrieved September 2006 from http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/2847
8. Brandt, C. D. (2003). Availability and accessibility of the nation's research infrastructure: The transfer of assistive technology by federal laboratories. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3/4), 197-205.
9. Brandt, E. N., & Pope, A. M. (Eds.). (1997). Enabling America. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Burns, T. R, & Flam, H. (1987). The shaping of social organization: Social rule system theory with applications. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11. Carlson, D., & Ehrlich, N. (2005).Assistive technology and information technology use and need by persons with disabilities in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
12. Center for American Progress. (2008). Haywire FCC spectrum auction: U.S. needs national broadband strategy. Media & Culture. Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/08/haywireJcc.html
13. Century Foundation. (2006). Public policy in older America: A Century Foundation guide to the issues. New York: The Century Foundation Press.
14. Cohen, A. B., & Hanft, R S. (2004). Technology in American health care: Policy directions for effective evaluation and management. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
15. Crandall, R W., Hahn, R W., Litan, R E., & Wallsten, S. (2004). Bandwith for the people. Retrieved February 2008 from http://paper s.ssrn.com/soI3/papers.cfm?abstrac_id= 728569
16. Czepiel, J. A. (1974). Word-of-mouth processes in the diffusion of a major technological innovation. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(2), 172-180.
17. European Commission. (2003). Access to assistive technology in the European Union. European Commission Directorate General for Employment and Social Affairs Unit E. 4, pp. 1188.
18. Freiman, M. P., Mann, W. C., Johnson, J., Lin, S., & Locklear, C. (2006). Public funding and support ofassistive technologies for persons with disabilities (No. 2006-04). AARP Public Policy Institute. Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.aa rp.org/ppi
19. Gibson, M. J. (2003). Beyond 50.03: A report to the nation on in dependent living and disability research report. Retrieved September 2006 from
20. http://www.aarp.org/research/housing-mobility/homecare/aresearch-import-752D17817. html
21. Gist, J. (2000, April). Income distribution and wealth distribution in 1998: Findings from the survey of consumer finances [Research report]. Retrieved March 2006 from
22. http://www.aa rp.org/research/assistance/incomedist/a research-import 322- DD44.html#Age
23. Gist, J. (2002, April). Deeper in debt: Trends among midlife and older American s [Research report]. AARP. Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.aarp.org/research/assistance/incomedistiaresearch-import-322-DD44.html#Age
24. Goodman, N. J., & Stapleton, D. C. (2005). Federal program expenditures for working-age people with disabilities: Research report. Accepted Paper Series, Forth coming Journal of Disability Policy Studies. Retrieved March 2006 from http://papers.ssrn.com
25. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin &Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. He, W., Sengupta, M., Velkoff, V. A., & DeBarros, K. A. (2005). U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, 65 + in the United States: 2005. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
27. King, T. (1999). Assistive technology: Essential human factors. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
28. Knops, H. Th. P. (2003).Shaping the future with assistive technology. In Assistive technology-Shaping the future (Assistive Technology Research Series 11, pp. 9-13). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
29. Koebel, C. T., & Cavell, M. (2006). Characteristics of innovative production home builders (Prepared for the Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
30. Levine, D. I. (1997). Reinventing disability policy. Institute of Industrial Relations Working Paper Series Working Paper No. 65, 1-20. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com
31. Litan: U.S. health care costs could be slashed through accelerated broadband deployment for seniors, disabled. (2005, December 8). Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.newmillenniumresearch.org/news/120805_Litan_release_ FINAL.pdf
32. Macro environment and telecommunications: Convergence. (2006) Retrieved May 2006 from http://cbdd.wsu.edu/kewlconten ticdoutputlTR501/page29.htm
33. National Federation of the Blind. (n.d.) Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Default.asp
34. National Science Foundation. (2006). Retrieved June 7, 2008, from http://www.qolt.org
35. Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology Transfer. (2008) Retrieved September 2008 from http://cosmos.buffalo.edu/t2rerc
36. Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Disability Demographics and Statistics. (2005). 2004 disability status reports. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.disabilitystatistics.org
37. Rich, R, Erb, C. T., & Rich R A. (2002). Critical legal and policy issues for people with disabilities. Retrieved September 2006 from http://papers.ssrn.com/soI3/papers
38. Sandhu, J. S., Saarnio, I., & Wiman, R (2001). Information and communications technologies and disability in developing countries: A technical note. Washington, DC: World Bank.
39. Schloss, I.P. (1976). Report of the panel on research programs to aid the handicapped. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
40. Seelman, K. D. (2005). Universal design and orphan technology: Do we need both ? Disability Studies Quarterly, 25(3).
41. Stephanidis, C. (E d.), (2005). User interfaces for all: Concepts, methods and tools. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
43. Strauss, K. P. (2006).A new civil right. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
44. Switzerland Federal Office of Communications. (n. d.), Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.bakom.ch/index. html?lang=en
45. Tewey, B. P. (1997). Building participatory action research partnerships in disability and rehabilitation research. Washington, DC: National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
46. Thibodeau, P. (2003, January 13). Pervasive computing gets organized. Computer World [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 2006 from
47. http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId = 77369 of Medical Technology: Opportunities for assessment. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
48. U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment. (1982). Technology and handicapped people. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved October 2005 from http://www.wws.princeton.edu/ota
49. U.S. Department Commerce. (2003). Technology assessment and the U.S. assistive technology industry. Washington, DC: Bureau of Industry & Security Office of Strategic Industries and Economics. Retrieved October 2004 from
50. http://www.bxa.doc.govlDefense Industrial Base Programs/OSIES/efMarketResearchRpts/assisttechrept
51. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2007). Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.pathnet.org/sp.asp?mc=abou_path
52. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.), Connecting the globe: A regulator's guide to building a global information community. Retrieved February 2008 from
53. http://www.fcc.gov/connectglobe/sec7.html
54. U.S. National Council on Disability. (2001). Accessible future. Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2001/pdf/accessiblefuture.pdf
55. U.S.National Council on Disability. (2006a). Federal legislation and regulation prohibiting telecommunications and information services discrimination. Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2006/discrimination.htm
56. U.S. National Council on Disability. (2006b). Issues in creating livable communities for people with disabilities. Retrieved February 2008 from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2007livable_communities_10-01-07.htm
57. White, G. W., Suchowierska, M., & Campbell, M. (2004). Developing and systematically implementing participatory action research.Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 85, 2.
58. Whiteneck, G. (2006). Section B. In J. M. Field, A. M, Jette, & L. Martin. (Eds.), (2006). Workshop on disability in America: A new look. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
59. Winters, J. (Ed.), (2007). Accessibility and usability considerations for medical instrumentation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor and Francis.
60. Winters, J., & Herman, W. (1999, April). Workshop on home care technologies for the 21st century. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved June 7, 2008, from http://www.eng.mu.edu/wintersj/HCTWork shop
61. Wireless spectrum: Why should you care what the candidates think? (2008). The Huffington Post. Retrieved February 2008 from
62. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-freedman/wireless-sp ectrum-why-sh_b_81024.html
63. World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.