Loughborough University
Leicestershire, UK
LE11 3TU
+44 (0)1509 263171
Loughborough University

Loughborough University Institutional Repository

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/14862

Title: Evaluation of an assistive technology product design using a paired comparisons method within a mixed methods approach: A case study evaluating preferences for four types of cutlery with 34 upper limb impaired participants
Authors: Torrens, George
Smith, Nicholas C.S.
Keywords: Cutlery
Mixed methods
Paired comparisons
Product design
Issue Date: 2013
Publisher: © Informa UK, Ltd.
Citation: TORRENS, G.E. and SMITH, N.C.S., 2013. Evaluation of an assistive technology product design using a paired comparisons method within a mixed methods approach: A case study evaluating preferences for four types of cutlery with 34 upper limb impaired participants. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 8 (4), pp. 340 - 347.
Abstract: The purpose of the study was the assessment of preferences for 4 types of assistive technology (AT) domestic cutlery with 24 female and 10 male participants who had a range of upper limb impairments. A mixed-methods methodology, that included a paired comparisons analysis, was used to inform product development. Qualitative and quantitative data collected at the time provided triangulation of cohort preferences and insight into the reasoning of the participants. The results indicate that a high friction surface on AT cutlery handles is useful for all upper limb impaired users; however, the unconventional shapes of the Caring Cutlery better match the grip patterns generated by those with Arthritis. Conventionally shaped handles are favoured by those who generate conventional grip patterns. Statistical analysis of the paired comparisons results indicated a clear preference for the Caring Cutlery by those with Arthritis. The Etan cutlery set was favoured by those using one hand that predominantly had Hemiplegia following a Stroke. The paired comparisons method was used as part of a mixed methodology that was considered to be cost effective. The authors concluded that the methodology was useful to help validate a new inclusive/universal product design when the desired attributes are not accurately known.
Version: Submitted version
DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2012.735746
URI: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/14862
Publisher Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2012.735746
ISSN: 1748-3107
Appears in Collections:Published Articles (Design School)

Files associated with this item:

File Description SizeFormat
Torrens_cutlery_pairedcomparisions_re-assembled-submitted_D&RAT2012.pdfSubmitted version305.8 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

 

SFX Query

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.