skip to main content
10.1145/3441000.3441049acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesozchiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Privacy by Design in Aged Care Monitoring Devices? Well, Not Quite Yet!

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 February 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Aged Care Monitoring Devices (ACMDs) collect and share information about older adults to ensure their wellbeing. While monitoring devices enable older adults to live independently at home, they pose significant privacy challenges. Within HCI, research has sought to understand users’ privacy concerns, but technology developers’ perceptions of privacy have been explored less. According to the Privacy by Design (PbD) framework, developers should incorporate privacy safeguards into devices prior to deployment. However, little is known about how this is done in practice. To better understand developers’ views on privacy, we interviewed 12 developers from ACMD companies and found five factors that affect how they address privacy: 1) users’ requirements, 2) presumptions about users’ privacy perceptions, 3) privacy laws and regulations, 4) third-party providers, and 5) financial challenges. These factors interconnect with other internal organisational challenges. Our research demonstrates the constraints that make it difficult for developers to implement PbD in practice.

References

  1. AARP (American Association of Retired People). 2011. Aging in place: A state survey of livability policies and practices. Retrieved June, 2019 from http://www.ncsl.org/documents/transportation/Aging-in-Place-2011.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AGPC (Australian Government Productivity Commission). 2015. Housing Decisions of Older Australian. Retrieved February, 2019 from https://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed/housing-decisions-older-australians/housing-decisions-older-australians.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Tousif Ahmed, Apu Kapadia, Venkatesh Potluri, and Manohar Swaminathan.2018. "Up to a Limit? Privacy Concerns of Bystanders and Their Willingness to Share Additional Information with Visually Impaired Users of Assistive Technologies." Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2(3), 1-27. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3264899Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sami Alkhatib, Jenny Waycott, George Buchanan and Rachelle Bosua. 2018. Privacy and the Internet of Things (IoT) Monitoring Solutions for Older Adults: A Review. In Connecting the System to Enhance the Practitioner and Consumer Experience in Healthcare: Selected Papers from the 26th Australian National Health Informatics Conference (HIC 2018) (Vol. 252, p. 8). IOS Press. DOI: https://doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-890-7-8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Hala Assal and Sonia Chiasson. 2019. 'Think secure from the beginning': A Survey with Software Developers. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper 289, 13 pages. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/3290605.3300519Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Oshrat Ayalon and Eran Toch. 2019. A/P(rivacy) Testing: Assessing Applications for Social and Institutional Privacy. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper LBW0261, 6 pages. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/3290607.3312972Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Ramakrishna Ayyagari. 2012. An exploratory analysis of data breaches from 2005-2011: Trends and insights. Journal of Information Privacy and Security, (82), 33-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15536548.2012.10845654Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Wei Bai, Moses Namara, Yichen Qian, Patrick Gage Kelley, Michelle L. Mazurek, and Doowon Kim. 2016. An Inconvenient Trust: User Attitudes toward Security and Usability Tradeoffs for KeyDirectory Encryption Systems. In Twelfth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2016). USENIX Association, 113–130. DOI: https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2016/technical-sessions/presentation/baiGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Rebecca Balebako, Abigail Marsh, Jialiu Lin, Jason I. Hong, and Lorrie Cranor. 2014. The privacy and security behaviours of smartphone app developers. Workshop on Usable Security (USEC 2014), DOI: https://doi.org/10.14722/usec.2014.23006Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Kathrin Bednar, Sarah Spiekermann, and Marc Langheinrich. 2019. Engineering Privacy by Design: Are engineers ready to live up to the challenge? The Information Society 35, 3 (2019), 122–142. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2019.1583296Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Colin Bennett and Smith Oduro-Marfo. 2018. GLOBAL Privacy Protection: Adequate Laws, Accountable Organizations and/or Data Localization? In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Joint Conference and 2018 International Symposium on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Wearable Computers (UbiComp ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 880–890. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3267305.3274149Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Andrew Besmer and Heather Richter Lipford. 2010. Moving beyond untagging: photo privacy in a tagged world. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10). ACM, 1563-1572. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/1753326.1753560Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jeremy Birnholtz and McKenzie Jones-Rounds. 2010. Independence and interaction: understanding seniors' privacy and awareness needs for aging in place. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10). ACM, 143-152. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/1753326.1753349Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Duncan Boldy, Linda Grenade, Gill Lewin, Elizabeth Karol, and Elissa Burton.2011. Older people's decisions regarding 'ageing in place': A Western Australian case study. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 30(3), 136-142.DOI: https://doi-org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2010.00469.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. DanaKai Bradford and Qing Zhang. 2016. How to Save a Life: Could Real-Time Sensor Data Have Saved Mrs Elle?. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). ACM, 910-920. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/2851581.2851598Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 77-101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Carole Cadwalladr and Emma Graham-Harrison. 2018. Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach. Retrieved March, 2019 from https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-electionGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelly E. Caine, Wendy A. Rogers, and Arthur D. Fisk. 2005. Privacy perceptions of an aware home with visual sensing devices. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 49, No. 21, pp. 1856-1858). SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120504902108Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Kelly Caine. 2016. "Local standards for sample size at CHI." In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 981-992. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/2858036.2858498Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Ann Cavoukian. 2009. Privacy by design: The 7 foundational principles. Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, Canada, 5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Ann Cavoukian. 2012. Privacy by design and the emerging personal data ecosystem. Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61350-501-4.ch007Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Ann Cavoukian. 2013. Privacy by design: leadership, methods, and results. In European Data Protection: Coming of Age (pp. 175-202). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5170-5_8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Shomir Chaudhuri, Hilaire Thompson, and George Demiris. 2014. Fall detection devices and their use with older adults: a systematic review. Journal of geriatric physical therapy (2001), 37(4), 178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0b013e3182abe779Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Veerle Claes, Els Devriendt, Jos Tournoy, and Koen Milisen. 2015. Attitudes and perceptions of adults of 60 years and older towards in-home monitoring of the activities of daily living with contactless sensors: an explorative study. International journal of nursing studies, 52(1), 134-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.05.010Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Joseph F. Coughlin, Lisa A. D'Ambrosio, Bryan Reimer, and Michelle R. Pratt. 2007. Older adult perceptions of smart home technologies: implications for research, policy and market innovations in healthcare. In 2007 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (pp. 1810-1815). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2007.4352665Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jessica Davis. 2018. Hackers breach 1.5 million Singapore patient records, including the prime minister's. Retrieved Jan, 2019 from https://www.healthcareit.com.au/article/hackers-breach-15-million-singapore-patient-records-including-prime-ministersGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Michael DeBellis and Christine Haapala. 1995. User-centric software engineering. IEEE Expert, 10(1), 34-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/64.391959Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Angelika Dohr, Robert Modre-Opsrian, Mario Drobics, Dieter Hayn, and Günter Schreier. 2010."The internet of things for ambient assisted living." In 2010 seventh international conference on information technology: new generations, pp. 804-809. IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ITNG.2010.104Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. FTC (Federal Trade Commission). 2012. FTC Issues Final Commission Report on Protecting Consumer Privacy. Retrieved February 2019 from https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/03/ftc-issues-final-commission-report-protecting-consumer-privacyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Thanassis Giannetsos, Tassos Dimitriou, and Neeli R. Prasad. "People‐centric sensing in assistive healthcare: Privacy challenges and directions." Security and Communication Networks 4, no. 11 (2011): 1295-1307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sec.313Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Jeff Goldman. 2016. 32 Percent of Companies Don't Evaluate Their Third-Party Vendors. Retrieved April, 2019 from https://www.esecurityplanet.com/network-security/one-third-of-companies-dont-evaluate-their-third-party-vendors.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Daniel Greene and Katie Shilton. 2018. Platform privacies: Governance, collaboration, and the different meanings of “privacy” in iOS and Android development. New Media & Society 20, 4 (2018), 1640–1657. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444817702397Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Irit Hadar, Tomer Hasson, Oshrat Ayalon, Eran Toch, Michael Birnhack, Sofia Sherman, and Arod Balissa. 2018. Privacy by designers: software developers' privacy mindset. Empirical Software Engineering, 23(1), 259-289. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-017-9517-1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Margaret C. Harrell and Melissa A. Bradley. 2009. Data collection methods. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups, DTIC Document, Tech. Rep. Retrieved Jan, 2020 from http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/ technical reports/2009/RAND TR718.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. HealthTech Startups in Australia. 2019. Retrieved February, 2020 from https://tracxn.com/explore/HealthTech-Startups-in-AustraliaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Melinda Heinz, Peter Martin, Jennifer A. Margrett, Mary Yearns, Warren Franke, Hen I. Yang, Johnny Wong, and Carl K. Chang. 2013. Perceptions of technology among older adults. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 39(1), 42-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3928/00989134-20121204-04Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Susanne Hertz and Monica Alfredsson. 2003. Strategic development of third-party logistics providers. Industrial marketing management, 32(2), 139-149.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(02)00228-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Alexis Hope, Ted Schwaba, and Anne Marie Piper. 2014. Understanding digital and material social communications for older adults. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3903-3912. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/2556288.2557133Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Paul Karp. 2018. Police can access My Health Record without court order, parliamentary library warns. Retrieved 2019 from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/25/police-can-access-my-health-record-without-court-order-parliamentary-library-warnsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Christopher Knaus. 2019. More than 2.5 million people have opted out of My Health Record. Retrieved March, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/20/more-than-25-million-people-have-opted-out-of-my-health-recordGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Ann Light, Tuck W. Leong and Toni Robertson. 2015. Ageing well with CSCW. In ECSCW 2015: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19-23 September 2015, Oslo, Norway (pp. 295-304). Springer, Cham. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1007/978-3-319-20499-4_16Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Tom Lodge, Andy Crabtree, and Anthony Brown. 2018. "IoT App Development: Supporting Data Protection by Design and Default." In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Joint Conference and 2018 International Symposium on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Wearable Computers, pp. 901-910. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3267305.3274151Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Gonçalo Marques. 2019. Ambient Assisted Living and Internet of Things. In Harnessing the Internet of Everything (IoE) for Accelerated Innovation Opportunities (pp. 100-115). IGI Global. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7332-6.ch005Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Dana McCauley. 2018. Millions to opt out of My Health Record as backlash builds. Retrieved Jan, 2019 from https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/millions-to-opt-out-of-my-health-record-as-backlash-builds-20180724-p4ztb0.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Andrew R. McNeill, Lynne Coventry, Jake Pywell, and Pam Briggs. 2017. Privacy Considerations when Designing Social Network Systems to Support Successful Ageing. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 6425-6437. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3025453.3025861Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Joshua McVeigh-Schultz, Anya Kolesnichenko, and Katherine Isbister. 2019. Shaping Pro-Social Interaction in VR: An Emerging Design Framework. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper 564, 12 pages. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3290605.3300794Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Tracy Mitzner, Marita O'Brien, and Wendy Rogers. 2012. Emerging technologies for healthcare and aging. In CHI '12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2699-2702. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/2212776.2212699Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Pardis Emami Naeini, Sruti Bhagavatula, Hana Habib, Martin Degeling, Lujo Bauer, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Norman Sadeh. 2017. Privacy Expectations and Preferences in an IoT World. In Thirteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2017). USENIX Association, 399–412. https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2017/technical-sessions/presentation/naeiniGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Miya Narushima and Makie Kawabata. 2020. "“Fiercely independent”: Experiences of aging in the right place of older women living alone with physical limitations." Journal of Aging Studies 54: 100875. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2020.100875Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. OAIC (Office of the Australian Information Commissioner). 2018. Australian entities and the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Retrieved May, 2018 from https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/guidance-and-advice/australian-entities-and-the-eu-general-data-protection-regulation/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. OAIC (Office of the Australian Information Commissioner). 2018. Guide to Securing Personal Information Retrieved May, 2018 from https://www.oaic.gov.au/agencies-and-organisations/guides/guide-to-securing-personal-informationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Sebastiaan T.M. Peek, Eveline JM Wouters, Joost Van Hoof, Katrien G. Luijkx, Hennie R. Boeije, and Hubertus JM Vrijhoef. 2014. Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. International journal of medical informatics, 83(4), 235-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Alicia Phaneuf. 2019. Here are the top health tech companies and startups developing wearable medical devices. Retrieved September, 2019 from https://www.businessinsider.com/wearable-tech-companies-startups/?r=AU&IR=TGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Maribel Pino, Mélodie Boulay, François Jouen, and Anne Sophie Rigaud. 2015. “Are we ready for robots that care for us?” Attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 7, 141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2015.00141Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. James Rachels.1975. Why privacy is important. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4, 323–333.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Damith C. Ranasinghe, Roberto L. Shinmoto Torres, and Asanga Wickramasinghe. 2013. Automated activity recognition and monitoring of elderly using wireless sensors: Research challenges. In Advances in Sensors and Interfaces (IWASI), 2013 5th IEEE International Workshop on (pp. 224-227). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/IWASI.2013.6576067Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Hirak Ray, Flynn Wolf, Ravi Kuber, and Adam J. Aviv. 2019. "Woe is me": Examining Older Adults' Perceptions of Privacy. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper LBW2611, 6 pages. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3290607.3312770Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Rivka Ribak. 2019. Translating privacy: developer cultures in the global world of practice. Information, Communication and Society, 22(6), 838-853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1577475Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Maricel Sanchez. 2019. 5 promising European agetech startups serving the elderly. Retrieved September, 2019 from https://www.eu-startups.com/2019/07/5-promising-european-agetech-startups-serving-the-elderly/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Awanthika Senarath and Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage. 2018. Why developers cannot embed privacy into software systems? An empirical investigation. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering 2018 (EASE’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 211–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3210459.3210484Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Awanthika Senarath, Marthie Grobler, and Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage. 2019. A model for system developers to measure the privacy risk of data. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.738Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Awanthika Senarath, Marthie Grobler, and Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage.2019. "Will they use it or not? Investigating software developers’ intention to follow privacy engineering methodologies." ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security (TOPS). 22(4), 1-30. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3364224Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Katie Shilton. 2013. Values levers: Building ethics into design. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 38(3), 374-397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912436985Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Alberto Sillitti and Giancarlo Succi. 2005. Requirements engineering for agile methods. In Engineering and Managing Software Requirements (pp. 309-326). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28244-0_14Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Daniel J. Solove. 2008. Understanding privacy (Vol. 173). Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press. USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Luke Stark, Jen King, Xinru Page, Airi Lampinen, Jessica Vitak, Pamela Wisniewski, Tara Whalen, and Nathaniel Good. 2016. Bridging the Gap between Privacy by Design and Privacy in Practice. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3415-3422. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/2851581.2856503Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Dianne M. Steel and Marion A. Gray. 2009. Baby boomers' use and perception of recommended assistive technology: a systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 4(3), 129-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17483100902767175Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Robert Steele, Amanda Lo, Chris Secombe, and Yuk Kuen Wong. 2009. Elderly persons’ perception and acceptance of using wireless sensor networks to assist healthcare. International journal of medical informatics, 78(12), 788-801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.08.001Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Superflux. 2015. Uninvited guests. Video. 2015. Retrieved May 15, 2019 from https://vimeo.com/172893044.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Madiha Tabassum, Tomasz Kosiński, Alisa Frik, Nathan Malkin, Primal Wijesekera, Serge Egelman, and Heather Richter Lipford. 2019. "Investigating Users' Preferences and Expectations for Always-Listening Voice Assistants." Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3(4), 1-23. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3369807Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Mohammad Tahaei, Kami Vaniea, and Naomi Saphra. 2020. Understanding Privacy-Related Questions on Stack Overflow. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376768Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Bert Vandenberghe and Karin Slegers. 2016. Designing for Others, and the Trap of HCI Methods & Practices. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 512-524. DOI: https://doi-org /10.1145/2851581.2892584Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. John Vines, Stephen Lindsay, Gary W. Pritchard, Mabel Lie, David Greathead, Patrick Olivier, and Katie Brittain. 2013. "Making family care work: dependence, privacy and remote home monitoring telecare systems." In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing, pp. 607-616. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/2493432.2493469Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Alexandra Voit, Elizabeth Stowell, Dominik Weber, Christoph Witte, Daniel Kärcher, and Niels Henze.2016. "Envisioning an ambient smart calendar to support aging in place." In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct, pp. 1596-1601.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2968219.2968555Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Rolf H. Weber. 2010. Internet of Things–New security and privacy challenges. Computer law and security review, 26(1), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2009.11.008Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Peter Weill and Jeanne W. Ross.2004. IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Harvard Business Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Mary-Anne Williams.2009. Privacy management, the law & business strategies: A case for privacy driven design. In 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering (Vol. 3, pp. 60-67). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CSE.2009.478Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Richmond Y. Wong and Deirdre K. Mulligan. 2019. Bringing Design to the Privacy Table: Broadening “Design” in “Privacy by Design” Through the Lens of HCI. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper 262, 17 pages. DOI: https://doi-org/10.1145/3290605.3300492Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Ya-Huei Wu, Souad Damnée, Hélène Kerhervé, Caitlin Ware, and Anne-Sophie Rigaud. 2015. Bridging the digital divide in older adults: a study from an initiative to inform older adults about new technologies. Clinical interventions in aging, 10, 193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S72399Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Chang-Kuo Yeh, Hung-Ming Chen, and Jung-Wen Lo. "An authentication protocol for ubiquitous health monitoring systems." Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering 33, no. 4 (2013): 415-419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5405/jmbe.1478Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Naaman Zhou. 2018. My Health Record privacy framework 'identical' to failed UK scheme, expert says. Retrieved Jan, 2019 from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jul/22/my-health-record-identical-to-failed-uk-scheme-privacy-expert-saysGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Shelley Evenson. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ’07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. Sandra A Zwijsen, Alistair R. Niemeijer, and Cees MPM Hertogh. 2011. Ethics of using assistive technology in the care for community-dwelling elderly people: an overview of the literature. Aging and mental health, 15(4), 419-427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2010.543662Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    OzCHI '20: Proceedings of the 32nd Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction
    December 2020
    764 pages

    Copyright © 2020 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 15 February 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate362of729submissions,50%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format