7 General Discussion 141 frequently overlooking factors such as usability and engagement, which are especially important for individuals with limited digital skills and motivation. Participatory design presents valuable qualities that could be effective in overcoming these barriers. Its flexible, visual, and hands-on nature allows for adapting research methodologies to meet the specific needs of different target groups. For instance, as detailed in Chapter 3, to engage individuals facing literacy challenges, visual storyboards can be employed in a co-constructing stories session. Additionally, the interaction with experience prototypes, as presented in Chapter 3, makes future technologies more tangible and concrete for individuals who struggle with understanding abstract concepts. Participatory design also prioritizes understanding and designing for the user’s needs by understanding the complex interplay of emotional, cognitive, and environmental factors within a person’s context that risk being isolated in more traditional approaches. Finally, the iterative and bottom-up nature of participatory design helps establish a trust-based relationship with participants, potentially increasing the willingness to engage among those who would normally be reluctant to get involved. However, it should be acknowledged that participatory design is not without its limitations. Its bottom-up, situational nature can limit the generalizability of its findings to other contexts, necessitating caution in their interpretation. Furthermore, while participatory design can be implemented on a smaller scale to reduce resource demands, its methods typically still require considerable time and resources. This can pose challenges, particularly when designing eHealth solutions for populations with a low SEP, which already demands additional resources. Moreover, participatory design may not be entirely feasible for certain low-SEP subgroups. The “Complexly Challenged” group for example, may face too many constraints in time, energy, or resources to fully commit to a participatory design process. This group might be better engaged with research activities like those borrowed from anthropology, such as interviews or participant observation. These methods allow researchers to immerse themselves in the lived experiences of this group without requiring the same level of commitment from participants. This approach also respects the time and resource limitations faced by participants, as it does not demand active involvement or extensive contributions from them. Furthermore, participatory design can pose significant cognitive challenges, particularly for certain groups with lower self-confidence, such as the “Doubtfully Disadvantaged” subgroup. Within participatory design, participants are sometimes expected to work on activities independently at home without direct support from researchers. They can also be expected to engage in co-creation sessions that require them to imagine future scenarios or conceptualize potential product features, which can be demanding for some individuals.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw