Accessibility is a critical interior design consideration that increases performance level and allows older adults to be independent and physically active in their daily activities. This study used a case study to present a new method of combining ageing simulation with personas through importance-performance analysis (IPA) and supporting the basic activities of daily living (BADL). This study developed a prioritized persona-based (PP-B) model to create accessible interiors in senior housing environments for healthy ageing. This model was constructed based on an ontology framework. The data that was gathered through the self-assessment accessibility questionnaire by 60 older adults and it was depicted in the IPA matrix, which later translated into personas. These personas were simulated with an ageing suit by interior architecture students based on the BADL of accessible senior housing environments. This study was an initial attempt to deal with the complex nature of accessible interior design and its attributes for ageing studies, which are often considered as theoretical concepts and standards. The main innovation of this developed PP-B model was to synchronize interior design knowledge on accessibility attributes and users’ BADL performance along their accessibility importance rankings. Findings are beneficial for interior designers to make human-centred interior design decisions.
JuniorRCFFernandesTGBorgesGFGuerraROAbreuDCC.Factors associated with low levels of physical activity among elderly residents in a small urban area in the interior of the Brazilian Amazon. Arch Gerontol Geriatr2018; 75: 37–43.
AnSLeeYKimJT.The effect of the public exercise environment on the physical activity for the active ageing of the elderly. Indoor Built Environ2013; 22: 319–331.
4.
WangFHePYuanCWangS.Isolated or integrated? Evaluation of ageing-friendly communities in Old Beijing City based on accessibility, social inclusion and equity. Indoor Built Environ2020; 29: 465–479.
5.
BamzarR.Assessing the quality of the indoor environment of senior housing for a better mobility: a Swedish case study. J House Built Environ2019; 34: 23–60.
KingACSalvoDBandaJAAhnDKChapmanJEGillTMFieldingRADemonsJTudor-LockeCRossoAPahorMFrankLD.Preserving older adults' routine outdoor activities in contrasting neighborhood environments through a physical activity intervention. Prev Med2017; 96: 87–93.
8.
HorgasALWilmsHBaltesMM.Daily life in very old age: everyday activities as expression of successful living. Gerontologist1998; 38: 556–568.
9.
CalderASoleGMulliganH.The accessibility of fitness centers for people with disabilities: a systematic review. Disabil Health J2018; 1: 1–18.
10.
YuCLeeY.Housing requirements for an ageing society. Indoor Built Environ2017; 26: 441–446.
11.
CampbellNM.Designing retirement community third places: attributes impacting how well social spaces are liked and used. J Interior Des2014; 39: 1–14.
12.
KeatesS.Design for the value of inclusiveness. In: JVan Den HovenPEVermaasIVan De Poel (eds) Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: Sources, theory, values and application domains. 1st ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Springer, 2015, pp.383–402.
13.
BianchinMHeylinghenA.Just design. Des Stud2018; 54: 1–22.
14.
HuppertF.Designing for older users. In: JClarksonSKeatesRColemanCLebbon (eds) Inclusive design: Design for whole population. 1st ed. London: Springer, 2003, pp.30–50.
15.
EvcilAN.Raising awareness about accessibility. Soc Behav Sci2012; 47: 490–494.
16.
Canadian Human Rights Commission. Performance Report, publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/BT31-4-25-2006E.pdf (2006, accessed 8 October 2019).
AnvariFTranHM. Persona ontology for user centered design professionals. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on information management and evaluation: ICIME 2013, RMIT University Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam,13–14 May 2013; pp.35–44. UK: Academic Conferences and Publishing International.
19.
CooperA.The inmates are running the asylum. Indianapolis, IN: SAMS, 1999.
20.
PruittJAdlinT.The persona life cycle: Keeping people in mind throughout product design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 2006.
21.
Grudin J and Pruitt J. Personas, Participatory Design and Product Development: An Infrastructure for Engagement. In: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, ACM Press, 2002, pp.144–161.
22.
MiaskiewiezTKozarKA.Personas and user centered design: how can personas benefit product design processes. Des Stud2011; 32: 417–430.
23.
Personasv LN. In: Soegaard M and Dam RF (eds.) The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed. Aarhus, Denmark: The Interaction Design Foundation, 2012, www.interactiondesign.org/encyclopedia/personas.html (2012, accessed 4 June 2020).
24.
WilkinsonCRAngeliA.Applying user centered and participatory design approaches to commercial product development. Des Stud2014; 35: 614–631.
25.
Goodman-DeaneJWallerSDeminDGonzalez-de-HerediaAClarkson PjBM. Evaluating Inclusivity Using Quantitative Personas. In: Design research society conference, Limerick, Ireland, 25–28 June 2018. Limerick: University of Limerick, 2018.
26.
IwarssonS. and Stahl A. Accessibility, usability and universal design- Positioning and definition of concepts describing person and environment relationships. Disabil Rehabil2003; 25: 57–66.
27.
HeylighenAVan Der LindenVVan SteenwinkelI.Ten questions concerning inclusive design of the built environment. Build Environ2017; 114: 507–517.
28.
MenecVH.The relation between everyday activities and successful aging: a 6-year longitudinal study. J Gerontol2003; 58: 74–82.
29.
VermeulenJNeyensJCLSpreeuwenbergMDRossumESipersWHabetsHHewsonDJWitteLP.User-centered development and testing of a monitoring system that provides feedback regarding physical functioning to elderly people. Patient Prefer Adhere2013; 7: 843–854.
30.
PostmaCEZwartkruis-PelgrimEDuDE.J. Challenges of doing empathic design: experiences from industry. Int J Des2012; 6: 59–70.
31.
PastalanLA.The empathic model: a methodological bridge between research and design. J Archit Educ1977; 31: 14–15.
32.
CardosoCClarksonPJ.Simulation in user-centered design: helping designers to empathize with atypical users. J Eng Des2012; 23: 1–23.
33.
LavalliereMD'AmbrosioLGennisABursteinAGodfreyKMWaerstadHPuleoRMLaurenrothACoughlinJF.Walking a mile in another's shoes: the impact of wearing an Age Suit. Gerontol Geriatr Educ2016; 38: 171–187.
34.
KullmanK.Prototyping bodies: a post-phenomenology of wearable simulations. Des Stud2016; 47: 73–90.
35.
MahoneyFIBarthelDW.A simple index of independence useful in scoring improvement in the rehabilitation of the chronically ill. Baltimore: Rehabilitation Section Baltimore City Medical Society, 1965.
36.
YesavageJABrinkTLRoseTLLumOHuangVAdeyMLeirerVO.Development and validation of geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res1983; 17: 37–49.
37.
AfacanY.Extending the importance–performance analysis (IPA) approach to Turkish elderly people’s self-rated home accessibility. J Hous and the Built Environ2019; 34: 619–642.
38.
ZijlstraEHagedoornMKrijnenWP.Van der Schans CP and Mobach MP. Route complexity and simulated physical ageing negatively influence wayfinding. Appl Ergon2016; 56: 62–67.
39.
AronAAronENSmollanD.Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. J Pers Soc Psychol1992; 63: 596–612.
40.
EvansMRChonK.Formulating and evaluating tourism policy using importance–performance analysis. J Hosp Tour Res1989; 13: 203–213.
41.
AbaloJVarelaJManzanoV.Importance values for importance performance analysis: a formula for spreading out values derived from preference rankings. J Bus Res2007; 60: 115–121.
MatzlerKBailomFHinterhuberHHRenzlBPichlerJ.The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction: a reconsideration of the importance–performance analysis. Ind Mark Manag2004; 33: 271–277.
44.
HoltzblattKWendellJBWoodS. Chapter 8: Building an affinity diagram. In: Holtzblatt K and Wendell JB WS (eds) Rapid contextual design: a how to guide to key techniques for user-centered design. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Elsevier, 2005, pp.159–178.
45.
StuderRBenjaminsVRFenselD.Knowledge engineering: principles and methods. Data Knowl Eng1998; 25: 161–197.
46.
ChenHLuoX.An automatic literature knowledge graph and reasoning network modeling framework based on ontology and natural language processing. Adv Eng Inform2019; 42: 1–17.
47.
AfacanYSürerE. Modeling a user-oriented ontology on accessible homes for supporting activities of daily living (ADL) in healthy aging. In: GoodTechs’ 19: Proceedings ACM Digital Library of the 5th EAI international conference on smart objects and technologies for social good, Politecnia de Universitat Valencia, Spain, 23–25 September 2019; pp.67–71.
TarrantASmithEK.The use of modified importance–performance framework to examine visitor satisfaction with attributes of outdoor recreation settings. Manag Leis2002; 7: 69–82.
50.
CohenUWeismanGD.Holding on to home: designing environments for people with dementia. 1st ed. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991.
51.
Wang J and Hadjri K. The Role of Co-housing in Building Sustainable Communities: Case studies from the UK. In: Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal. 3rd ABRA International Conference on Quality of Life, Kuching, Malaysia, 14 October–16 October 2017, pp. 255–265. UK: e-International Publishing House.
52.
Van HoofJYuCW.Ageing communities, supportive housing and enabling built environments. Indoor Built Environ2020; 29: 295–298.
53.
SimSKDuffyAHB.Towards ontology of generic engineering design activities. Res Eng Des2003; 14: 200–223.
