Social-structural lag revisited

Gerontechnology

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 129-139

  Peine, Alexander ^a   Neven, Louis ^b  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Age script; Domestication; Enrichment; Satisfaction; Social structural lag

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855511084     PISSN: 15691101     EISSN: 1569111X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3.002.00/1469     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Lawton MP. Future society and technology. In: Graafmans J, Taipale V, Charness N, editors. Gerontechnology - a sustainable investment in the future. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1998; pp 12-22
2. Riley MW. The dynamisms of life stages: Roles, people, and age. Human Development 1986;29(3):150-56; doi:10.1159/000273038
3. Riley MW. On the significance of age in sociology. American Sociological Review 1987;52(1):1-14; doi:10.2307/2095388
4. Riley MW, Riley JW. Structural lag: Past and future. In: Riley MW, Kahn RL, Foner A, editors. Age and structural lag. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1994; pp 15-36
5. Lawton MP. Behavior-relevant ecological factors. In: Schaie KW, Schooler C, editors. Social structure and aging: Psychological processes. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1989; pp 57-78
6. Lawton MP. Environmental proactivity in older people. In: Bengston VL, Schaie KW, editors. The course of later life - research and reflections. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1989; pp 15-23
7. Fozard JL, Rietsema J, Bouma H, Graafmans JAM. Gerontechnology: Creating enabling environments for the challenges and opportunities of aging. Educational Gerontology 2000;26(4):331-344; doi:10.1080/036012700407820
8. Bronswijk JEMH van. How James L. Fozard started with gerontechnology and why. Gerontechnology 2010;9(3):359-60; doi:10.4017/gt.2010.09.03.001.00
9. Bouma H. Professional ethics in gerontechnology: A pragmatic approach. Gerontechnology 2010;9(4):429-32; doi:10.4017/gt.2010.09.04.018.00
10. Docampo Rama M, Ridder H de, Bouma H. Technology generation and age in using layered interfaces. Gerontechnology 2001;1(1):25-40; doi:10.4017/gt.2001.01.01.003.00
11. Lawton MP, Nahemow L. Ecology and the aging process. In: Eisdorfer C, Lawton MP, editors. The psychology of adult development and aging. Washington: American Psychological Association; 1973; pp 619-674
12. Lawton MP. The elderly in context: Perspectives from environmental psychology and gerontology. Environment and Behavior 1985;17(4):501-519; doi:10.1177/0013916585174005
13. Lawton MP. Environmental taxonomy: Generalizations from research with older adults. In: Friedman SL, editor. Measuring environment across the life span: Emerging methods and concepts. Washington: American Psychological Association; 1999; pp 91-124
14. Riley MW, Riley JW. Longevity and social structure: The added years. Daedalus 1986;115(1):51-75
15. Riley MW, Riley JW. The lives of older people and changing social roles. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 1989;503(1):14-28; doi:10.1177/0002716289503001002
16. Baars J. Het nieuwe ouder worden - paradoxen en perspectieven van leven in de tijd [The new aging - Paradox and Perspective of living in a time frame]. Amsterdam: Humanistics University Press; 2006
17. Dannefer D, Uhlenberg P, Foner A, Abeles RP. On the shoulders of a giant: The legacy of Matilda White Riley for gerontology. Journal of Gerontology 2005;60B(6):S296-S304; doi:10.1093/geronb/60.6.S296
18. Fozard JL. Gerontechnology - beyond ergonomics and universal design. Gerontechnology 2002;1(3):137-39; doi:10.4017/gt.2001.01.03.001.00
19. Bouwhuis DG. Not care but leisure. Gerontechnology 2006;5(2):63-65; doi:10.4017/gt.2006.05.02.001.00
20. Bouma H, Fozard JL, Bronswijk JEMH van. Gerontechnology as a field of endeavour. Gerontechnology 2009;8(2):68-75; doi:10.4017/gt.2009.08.02.004.00
21. Fozard JL, Bouma H, Franco A, Bronswijk JEMH van. Homo ludens: Adult creativity and quality of life. Gerontechnology 2009;8(4):187-96; doi:10.4017/gt.2009.08.04.001.00
22. Bouwhuis DG. Design for personenvironment interaction in older age: A gerontechnological perspective. Gerontechnology 2003;2(3):232-46; doi:10.4017/gt.2003.02.03.002.00
23. Bouma H, Fozard JL, Bouwhuis DG, Taipale V. Gerontechnology in perspective. Gerontechnology 2007;6(4):190-216; doi:10.4017/gt.2007.06.04.003.00
24. Bronswijk JEMH van, Bouma H, Fozard JL, Kearns WD, Davison GC, Tuan P-C. Defining gerontechnology for R&D purposes. Gerontechnology 2009;8(1):3-10; doi:10.4017/gt.2009.08.01.002.00
25. Bronswijk JEMH van, Bouma H, Fozard JL. Technology for quality of life: An enriched taxonomy. Gerontechnology 2002;2(2):169-72; doi:10.4017/gt.2002.02.02.001.00
26. Silverman D. Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage; 2005
27. Gubrium JF, Holstein JA. The new language of qualitative method. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997
28. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research - grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage; 1990
29. Weber M. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr; 1922
30. Reed D, Monk A. Inclusive design: Beyond capabilities towards context of use. Universal Access in the Information Society 2011;10(3):295-305; doi:10.1007/s10209-010-0206-8
31. Bronswijk JEMH van. Persuasive gerontechnology: An introduction. In: IJsselsteijn W, Kort Y de, Midden C, Eggen B, Hoven E van den, editors. Persuasive technology. Berlin: Springer; 2006; pp 183-186
32. Dickinson A, Dewsbury G. Changing practices: Home and community based care technologies for independent living. Gerontechnology 2006;5(1):1-3; doi: 10.4017/gt.2006.05.01.001.00
33. Fagerberg J, Mowery DC, Nelson RR. The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005
34. Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M, Wajcman J, editors. The handbook of science and technology studies. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2008
35. Fagerberg J, Verspagen B. Innovation studies - the emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research Policy 2009;38(2):218-233; doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.006
36. Sörensen K, Williams R, editors. Shaping technology, guiding policy - concepts, spaces and tools. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2002
37. Coombs R, Green K, Richards A, Walsh V, editors. Technology and the market - demand, users and innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2001
38. Hippel E von. Democratizing innovation. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2005
39. Oudshoorn N, Pinch T, editors. How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies. New Baskerville: The MIT Press; 2003
40. Woodhouse E, Patton JW. Design by society: Science and technology studies and the social shaping of design. Design Issues 2004;20(3):1-12; doi:10.1162/0747936041423262
41. Abernathy WJ, Clark KB, Kantrow AM. Industrial renaissance - producing a competitive future for America. New York: Basic Books; 1983
42. Clark KB. The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Research Policy 1985;14(5):235-251; doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90007-1
43. Stewart J, Williams R. The wrong trousers? Beyond the design fallacy: Social learning and the user. In: Howcroft D, editors. Handbook of critical information systems research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2005; pp 195-221
44. Akrich M. The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker WE, Law J, editors. Shaping technology/building society - studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 1992; pp 205-224
45. Latour B. Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In: Bijker W, Law J, editors. Shaping technology/building society - studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 1992; pp 225-258
46. Akrich M, Latour B. A summary of a convenient vocabulary for the semiotics of human and nonhuman assemblies. In: Bijker W, Law J, editors. Shaping technology/building society - studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 1992; pp 259-264
47. Latour B. On technical mediation - philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge 1994;3(2):29-64
48. Oudshoorn N, Saetnan AR, Lie M. On gender and things: Reflections on an exhibition on gendered artifacts. Women's Studies International Forum 2002;25(4):471-483; doi:10.1016/S0277-5395(02)00284-4
49. Oost E van. Materialized gender: How shavers configure the users' feminity and masculinity. In: Oudshoorn N, Pinch T, editors. How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies. New Baskerville: The MIT Press; 2003; pp 193-208
50. Berg A-J, Lie M. Feminism and constructivism: Do artifacts have gender? Science, Technology and Human Values 1995;20(3):332-351; doi:10.1177/016224399502000304
51. Oudshoorn N, Pinch T. User-technology relationships: Some recent developments. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M, Wajcman J, editors. The handbook of science and technology studies. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2008; pp 541-565
52. Silverstone R, Hirsch E, Morley D. Information and communication technologies and the moral economy of the household. In: Silverstone R, Hirsch E, editors. Consuming technologies - media and information in domestic spaces. London: Routledge; 1992; pp 15-31
53. Silverstone R, Haddon L. Design and the domestication of information and communication technologies: Technical change and everyday live. In: Mansell R, Silverstone R, editors. Communication by design - the politics of information and communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996; pp 44-74
54. Lie M, Sörensen KH, editors. Making technology our own? Domesticating technology into everyday life. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press; 1996
55. Berker T, Hartmann M, Punie Y, Ward KJ, editors. Domestication of media and technology. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2006
56. Neven L. 'But obviously not for me': Robots, laboratories and the defiant identity of elder test users. Sociology of Health and Illness 2010;32(2):335-347; doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01218.x
57. Peine A. Understanding the dynamics of technological configurations - a conceptual framework and the case of Smart Homes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2009;76(3):396-409; doi:10.1016/j. techfore.2008.04.002
58. Roberts C, Mort M. Reshaping what counts as care: Older people, work and new technologies. ALTER - European Journal of Disability Research 2009;3(2):138-158; doi:10.1016/j.alter.2009.01.004
59. Joyce K, Loe M, editors. Technogenarians: Studying health and illness through an ageing, science, and technology lens. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010
60. Östlund B. Silver age innovators: A new approach to old users. In: Kohlbacher F, Herstatt C, editors. The silver market phenomenon: Marketing and innovation in the aging society. Berlin: Springer; 2011; pp 15-26
61. Sokoler T, Svensson MS. Embracing ambiguity in the design of non-stigmatizing digital technology for social interaction among senior citizens. Behaviour & Information Technology 2007;26(4):297-307; doi: 10.1080/01449290601173549
62. Neven L. Representations of the old and ageing in the design of the new and emerging: Assessing the design of ambient intelligence technologies for older people. Enschede: University of Twente; 2011
63. Fisk AD, Rogers WA, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J. Designing for older adults - principles and creative human factors approaches. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2009
64. Verganti R. Design-driven innovation -changing the rules of competition by radically innovating what things mean. Boston: Harvard Business Press; 2009
65. Silver A. Why Apple succeeds: Users, not designers, have the best ideas. Design Mind; http://designmind.frogdesign.com/blog/why-apple-succeeds-users-not-designers-have-the-best-ideas.html; retrieved April 8, 2011
66. Jones IR, Higgs P, Ekerdt DJ, editors. Consumption and generational change: The rise of consumer lifestyles. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers; 2009