Cover not available
Article published In:
Information Design Journal
Vol. 29:1 (2024) ► pp.55–83

From vulnerability to accessibility, and expansion possibilities

A systematic review, meta-analysis, and implications of information design for vulnerable populations

ORCID logo | University of Leeds
ORCID logo | University of Sydney
ORCID logo | University of Leeds

The importance of research in designing for the vulnerable lies in its commitment to address the inherent inequalities and injustices that pervade our socio-cultural fabric. This article presents a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis focused on the transition from vulnerability to accessibility in design for vulnerable populations, exploring the possibilities of extending this vital area to information design. Employing the PRISMA approach, the study meticulously analyses 30 selected papers to uncover insights into how design practices and methodologies are evolving to better address the needs of those often marginalized or overlooked. The findings illuminate the multifaceted nature of vulnerability, challenging information designers to think beyond traditional norms and engage in innovative practices that not only make solutions accessible but also ensure they are comprehensible. This research underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration and participatory approaches, emphasizing the importance of culturally sensitive, user-centered design solutions. The study culminates in identifying novel areas for future research, particularly emphasizing the development of information design that is tailored to the unique needs of vulnerable populations, thereby fostering inclusive growth.

Keywords: vulnerable populations, cultural responsiveness, design process, vulnerability, information design
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Search protocol
    • 2.2Selection protocol
    • 2.3Data extraction
    • 2.4Meta-analysis
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Study characteristics
    • 3.2Participants composition
      • 3.2.1Demographic characteristics
      • 3.2.2Recruitment process
    • 3.3Illuminating discoveries: Unpacking the findings
  • 4.Variables in design process
    • 4.1Exploring: Cultural sensitivity and awareness
    • 4.2Forming: Co-creation and community engagement
    • 4.3Storming: Negotiating cultural boundaries
    • 4.4Norming: Adapting design methods and processes
    • 4.5Performing: Evaluation and iteration
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1From vulnerability to accessibility
    • 5.2Expansion possibilities
  • 6.Limitations
  • 7.Conclusions and implications
  • References
Published online: 27 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.23011.ron
References
Aday, L. A.
(1994) Health status of vulnerable populations. Annual review of public health, 15 (1), 487–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amundson, R., & Tresky, S.
(2007) On a bioethical challenge to disability rights. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 32 (6), 541–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atmodiwirjo, P.
(2014) Space Affordances, Adaptive Responses and Sensory Integration by Autistic Children. International Journal of Design, 8 (3).Google Scholar
Babacan, H., & Gill, G. K.
(2012) Developing a cultural responsiveness framework in healthcare systems: an Australian example. Diversity and Equality in Health and Care, 9 (1).Google Scholar
Bridgelal Ram, M., Grocott, P. R., & Weir, H. C.
(2008) Issues and challenges of involving users in medical device development. Health Expectations, 11 (1), 63–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chander, J.
(2020) Disability rights and the emergence of disability studies. In Disability Studies in India (pp. 61–77). Routledge India. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chavalkul, Y., Saxon, A., & Jerrard, R. N.
(2011) Combining 2D and 3D design for novel packaging for older people. International Journal of Design, 5 (1), 43–58.Google Scholar
Christensen, K. M., Collins, S. D., Holt, J. M., & Phillips, C. N.
(2006) The relationship between the design of the built environment and the ability to egress of individuals with disabilities. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 2 (3).Google Scholar
Clarkson, P. J., & Coleman, R.
(2015) History of inclusive design in the UK. Applied ergonomics, 46 1, 235–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corsini, L., Jagtap, S., & Moultrie, J.
(2022) Design with and by Marginalized People in Humanitarian Makerspaces. International Journal of Design, 16 (2), 91–. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costanza-Chock, S.
(2020) Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comincioli, E., Hakoköngäs, E., & Masoodian, M.
(2022) Identifying and Addressing Implicit Ageism in the Co-Design of Services for Aging People. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (13), 7667. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardoso, C., & Clarkson, P. J.
(2012) Simulation in user-centred design: helping designers to empathise with atypical users. Journal of Engineering Design, 23 (1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Couvreur, L., Dejonghe, W., Detand, J., & Goossens, R.
(2013) The role of subjective well-being in co-designing open-design assistive devices. International Journal of Design, 7 (3), 57–70.Google Scholar
Dean, K. K., Wentworth, G., & LeCompte, N.
(2019) Social exclusion and perceived vulnerability to physical harm. Self and Identity, 18 (1), 87–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Olivo, P., Kelly L A van Bindsbergen, Huisman, J., Grootenhuis, M. A., & Rozendaal, M. C.
(2020) Designing Tactful Objects for Sensitive Settings: A Case Study on Families Dealing with Childhood Cancer. International Journal of Design, 14 (2), 103–.Google Scholar
Doetsch, J. N., Schlösser, C., Barros, H., Shaw, D., Krafft, T., & Pilot, E.
(2023) A scoping review on the impact of austerity on healthcare access in the European Union: rethinking austerity for the most vulnerable. International Journal for Equity in Health, 22 (1), 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. D., & Kurniawan, S. H.
(2000) Increasing the usability of online information for older users: A case study in participatory design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12 (2), 263–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A.
(2001) Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative science quarterly, 46 (2), 229–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisk, R. P., Dean, A. M., Alkire, L., Joubert, A., Previte, J., Robertson, N., & Rosenbaum, M. S.
(2018) Design for service inclusion: creating inclusive service systems by 2050. Journal of Service Management, 29 (5), 834–858. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frisby, W., Crawford, S., & Dorer, T.
(1997) Reflections on participatory action research: The case of low-income women accessing local physical activity services. Journal of Sport Management, 11 (1), 8–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gemser, G., de Bont, C., Hekkert, P., & Friedman, K.
(2012) Quality perceptions of design journals: The design scholars’ perspective. Design Studies, 33 (1), 4–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giovanangeli, A., & Oguro, S.
(2016) Cultural responsiveness: A framework for re-thinking students’ interculturality through study abroad. Intercultural Education, 27 (1), 70–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, M., Henderson, R., Holmes, J. H., Wolters, M. K., & Bennett, I. M.
(2016) Participatory design of ehealth solutions for women from vulnerable populations with perinatal depression. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 23 (1), 105–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grossman, L. V., Masterson Creber, R. M., Benda, N. C., Wright, D., Vawdrey, D. K., & Ancker, J. S.
(2019) Interventions to increase patient portal use in vulnerable populations: a systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 26 (8–9), 855–870. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Essen, A., & Ostlund, B.
(2011) Laggards as Innovators? Old Users as Designers of New Services & Service Systems. International Journal of Design, 5 (3), 89–98.Google Scholar
Gu, D., Andreev, K., & Dupre, M. E.
(2021) Major trends in population growth around the world. China CDC weekly, 3 (28), 604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hallegatte, S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Rozenberg, J., Bangalore, M., & Beaudet, C.
(2020) From poverty to disaster and back: A review of the literature. Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, 4 1, 223–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hart, J., Albadra, D., Paszkiewicz, N., Adeyeye, K., & Copping, A.
(2022) End user engagement in refugee shelter design: Contextualising participatory process. Design Studies, 80 1, 101107-. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harvard, Å., & Løvind, S.
(2002, June). “Psst”-ipatory Design: Involving artists, technologists, students and children in the design of narrative toys. In Proceedings of PDC (Vol. 21, pp. 377–381).Google Scholar
Hay, L., Duffy, A. H., McTeague, C., Pidgeon, L. M., Vuletic, T., & Grealy, M.
(2017) A systematic review of protocol studies on conceptual design cognition: Design as search and exploration. Design Science, 31, e10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herlihy, P. H.
(2003) Participatory research mapping of indigenous lands in Darien, Panama. Human Organization, 62 (4), 315–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hille, T.
(2011) Modern schools: a century of design for education. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Höysniemi, J., Hämäläinen, P., & Turkki, L.
(2003) Using peer tutoring in evaluating the usability of a physically interactive computer game with children. Interacting with computers, 15 (2), 203–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hussain, S., Sanders, E. B. -N., & Steinert, M.
(2012) Participatory design with marginalized people in developing countries: Challenges and opportunities experienced in a field study in Cambodia. International Journal of Design, 6(2), 91–109.Google Scholar
Ince Yenilmez, M.
(2015) Economic and social consequences of population aging the dilemmas and opportunities in the twenty-first century. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 10 1, 735–752. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imai, T., Takeo, H., Yoshimura, M., Sakata, A., Sakakibarai, N., & Sekine, C.
(2010) Improving the usability and learnability of a home electric appliance with a long-term usability study. Journal of Engineering Design, 21 (2–3), 173–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isomursu, M., Kuutti, K., and Väinämö, S.
(2004) Experience clip: method for user participation and evaluation of mobile concepts. In: Proceedings of the eighth conference on participatory design: artful integration: interweaving media, materials and practices, 27–31 July 2004, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jena, P. K.
(2020) Impact of pandemic COVID-19 on education in India. International journal of current research (IJCR), 12 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kambunga, A. P., Smith, R. C., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., & Otto, T.
(2023) Decolonial design practices: Creating safe spaces for plural voices on contested pasts, presents, and futures. Design Studies, 86 1, 101170-. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karaye, I. M., & Horney, J. A.
(2020) The impact of social vulnerability on COVID-19 in the US: an analysis of spatially varying relationships. American journal of preventive medicine, 59 (3), 317–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karunakara, U., & Stevenson, F.
(2012) Ending neglect of older people in the response to humanitarian emergencies. PLoS Medicine, 9 (12), e1001357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keele, S.
(2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering.Google Scholar
Khaimani, J., Bhatia, A. P. S., Jeurkar, A., Rao, D., Chirmule, N., Misra, P., … & Sheth, S.
(2022) Digital health initiatives can take better cognizance of marginalised communities in India. Journal of Global Health, 12 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keshavarz, M.
(2020) Violent Compassions: Humanitarian Design and the Politics of Borders. Design Issues, 36 (4), 20–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kjaersgaard, M. G., Knutz, E., & Markussen, T.
(2021) Design games as fieldwork: Re-visiting design games from a design anthropological perspective. Design Studies, 73 1, 100994-. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kramer, J., Rao, V., & Agogino, A. M.
(2022) Designing for Cervical Cancer Screening in Rural Nicaragua: A Case Study in the Informal Emergence of Complex Human-Centered Service Design. International Journal of Design, 16 (2), 107–. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, R.
(2002) The demographic transition: three centuries of fundamental change. Journal of economic perspectives, 17 (4), 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, C., Lee, C. F., & Xu, S.
(2020) Stigma Threat in Design for Older Adults: Exploring Design Factors that Induce Stigma Perception. International Journal of Design, 14(1), 51–.Google Scholar
Li, Q., & Luximon, Y.
(2018) Understanding Older Adults’ Post-adoption Usage Behavior and Perceptions of Mobile Technology. International Journal of Design, 12 (3), 93–.Google Scholar
Lim, C. S. C.
(2010) Designing inclusive ICT products for older users: taking into account the technology generation effect. Journal of Engineering Design, 21 (2–3), 189–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maguire, M., Peace, S., Nicolle, C., Marshall, R., Sims, R., Percival, J., & Lawton, C.
(2014) Kitchen Living in Later Life: Exploring Ergonomic Problems, Coping Strategies and Design Solutions. International Journal of Design, 8 (1).Google Scholar
Maric, J.
(2018) The gender-based digital divide in maker culture: features, challenges and possible solutions. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, (3), 147–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S.
(2010) Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on psychological science, 5 (4), 420–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McInnes, D. K., Li, A. E., & Hogan, T. P.
(2013) Opportunities for engaging low-income, vulnerable populations in health care: a systematic review of homeless persons’ access to and use of information technologies. American journal of public health, 103 (S2), e11–e24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendola, D., & Pera, A.
(2022) Vulnerability of refugees: Some reflections on definitions and measurement practices. International Migration, 60 (5), 108–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mould, O., Cole, J., Badger, A., & Brown, P.
(2022) Solidarity, not charity: Learning the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic to reconceptualize the radicality of mutual aid. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 47 (4), 866–879. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nazari, S., Rad, G. P., Sedighi, H., & Azadi, H.
(2015) Vulnerability of wheat farmers: Toward a conceptual framework. Ecological indicators, 52 1, 517–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, M., & Mougenot, C.
(2022) A systematic review of empirical studies on multidisciplinary design collaboration: Findings, methods, and challenges. Design Studies, 811, 101120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, J., Tabish, H., Welch, V., Petticrew, M., Pottie, K., Clarke, M., … & Tugwell, P.
(2014) Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 67 (1), 56–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ostroff, E.
(2011) Universal design: an evolving paradigm. Universal design handbook.Google Scholar
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … & Moher, D.
(2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International journal of surgery, 88 1, 105906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perdue, W. C., Stone, L. A., & Gostin, L. O.
(2003) The built environment and its relationship to the public’s health: the legal framework. American journal of public health, 93 (9), 1390–1394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayed, M., Elahi, T., Arefin Shimon, S. S., & Ahmed, N.
(2023, April). MFS Design in Appstore-enabled Smart Featurephones for Low-literate, marginalised Communities. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–19).Google Scholar
Rose, E. J.
(2016) Design as Advocacy: Using a Human-Centered Approach to Investigate the Needs of Vulnerable Populations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(4), 427–445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rufat, S., Tate, E., Burton, C. G., & Maroof, A. S.
(2015) Social vulnerability to floods: Review of case studies and implications for measurement. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 14 1, 470–486. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruecker, S.
(2016) Information Design as Principled Action: Making Information Accessible, Relevant, Understandable, and Useable. Design Issues, 32 (3), 118–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, N. W.
(2011) Indigenous Knowledge and Respectful Design: An Evidence-Based Approach. Design Issues, 27 (4), 68–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sreeraj, S. S., Unnikrishnan, A., Vishnu, K., Kennith, N. E., Anand, S., & Ramesh, M. V.
(2020) Empowerment of women self-help groups: Human centered design of a participatory iot solution. In 2020 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stankov, U., & Gretzel, U.
(2020) Tourism 4.0 technologies and tourist experiences: a human-centred design perspective. Information Technology & Tourism, 22 (3), 477–488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stone, K.
(2023) Reparative Game Creation: Designing For and With Psychosocial Disability. Design Issues, 39 (1), 14–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, I., Oki, M., Bourreau, B., Kitahara, I., & Suzuki, K.
(2018) An Empathic Design Approach to an Augmented Gymnasium in a Special Needs School Setting. International Journal of Design, 12 (3), 111-125.Google Scholar
Thomas, A.
(2006) Design, Poverty, and Sustainable Development. Design Issues, 22 (4), 54–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, K., Hardy, R. D., Lazrus, H., Mendez, M., Orlove, B., Rivera-Collazo, I., … & Winthrop, R.
(2019) Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10 (2), e565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tironi, M.
(2018) Speculative prototyping, frictions and counter-participation: A civic intervention with homeless individuals. Design Studies, 59 1, 117–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tobiasson, H., Sundblad, Y., Walldius, Å., & Hedman, A.
(2015) Designing for Active Life: Moving and Being Moved Together with Dementia Patients. International Journal of Design, 9 (3), 47–.Google Scholar
Tsai, W. C., Rogers, W. A., & Lee, C. F.
(2012) Older adults’ motivations, patterns, and improvised strategies of using product manuals. International Journal of Design, 6 (2), 55-65.Google Scholar
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C.
(1977) Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & organization studies, 2 (4), 419–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tutenel, P., & Heylighen, A.
(2021) Interweaving vulnerability and everyday design: Encounters around an aquarium in a paediatric oncology ward. Design Studies, 73 1, 101004–. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valk, C. A. L., Lovei, P., Cornelis, H., Chuang, Y., Visser, T., Pu, P., & Lu, Y.
(2021) Identifying a Motivational Profile for Older Adults Towards Increased Physical Activity. International Journal of Design, 15 (1), 17-.Google Scholar
Von Hoffman, A.
(2009) Housing and planning: A century of social reform and local power. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75 (2), 231–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weightman, A. P. H., Preston, N., Holt, R., Allsop, M., Levesley, M., & Bhakta, B.
(2010) Engaging children in healthcare technology design: developing rehabilitation technology for children with cerebral palsy. Journal of Engineering Design, 21 (5), 579–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Willen, S. S., Knipper, M., Abadía-Barrero, C. E., & Davidovitch, N.
(2017) Syndemic vulnerability and the right to health. The Lancet, 389 (10072), 964–977. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yeates, K., Lohfeld, L., Sleeth, J., Morales, F., Rajkotia, Y., & Ogedegbe, O.
(2015) A global perspective on cardiovascular disease in vulnerable populations. Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 31 (9), 1081–1093. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Q., & Luo, J.
(2023) Toward Artificial Empathy for human-centred Design: A Framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.10583.Google Scholar