Re-Configuring Users of Technologies Applied to Long-Term Care Settings in France and Japan: Boundary-Based and Relational Representations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60923/issn.2038-3460/21591Keywords:
social robots, care, older adults, representation, autonomy, relationalityAbstract
Addressing the care needs of older adults, especially for those with cognitive impairment, is a major challenge in contemporary societies. Some argue that technology can play a role and its presumed goals are to increase both the quality of care for older adults and the working environment of carers. In this regard, several studies have looked into views and perspectives inscribed in technology. However, most studies focus on the description of human and non-human actors connection, and there is a lack of empirical research focusing on the user representations embedded in technological objects and analysing the way users interact with others through the lens of care ethics. This study is based on interviews with actors and on ethnographic observations of various social robot uses in long-term care (LTC) facilities in different sociocultural situations (France and Japan), with an aim to understand how users are represented in the design of social robots. The study found the shared characteristics among distinct representations and identified divergent characteristics: boundary-based and relational representations. The findings suggest that different characteristics of user representation may challenge established social orderings. This research contributes to critically examining the practical and ethical implications of technology design, for a better understanding of the LTC context.
References
Aceros, Juan C., Pols, Jeannette and Domènech, Miquel (2015) Where is grandma? Home telecare, good aging and the domestication of later life, in “Technological Forecasting and Social Change”, 93, pp. 102-111.
AIST (National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology) and J.R.A (Japan Robot Association) (2018) Sho gaikoku no robotto kaigo kiki kanren gijutsu no chōsa [Survey of robot nursing care equipment-related technologies in abroad]. Available at: http://robotcare.jp/data/outcomes/RT%20other%20countries.pdf (retrieved July 5, 2025).
Akrich, Madeleine (1992) The description of technical objects, in Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge (MA), MIT Press, pp. 205-224.
Akrich, Madeleine (1995) User representations: Practices, methods and sociology, in Arie Rip, Thomas J. Misa and Johan W. Schot (eds.), Managing Technology in Society: The Approach of Constructive Technology Assessment, London, Pinter Publishers, pp. 167-184.
Alač, Morana (2009) Moving Android: On Social Robots and Body-in-Interaction, in “Social Studies of Science”, 39(4), pp. 491-528.
Banks, Marian R., Willoughby, Lisa M. and Banks, William A. (2008) Animal-Assisted Therapy and Loneliness in Nursing Homes: Use of Robotic versus Living Dogs, in “Journal of the American Medical Directors Association”, 9(3), pp. 173-177.
Callon, Michel (2008) Economic Markets and the Rise of Interactive Agencements: From Prosthetic Agencies to Habilitated Agencies, in Trevor Pinch and Richard Swedberg (eds.), Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies, Cambridge (MA), MIT Press, pp. 29-56.
Callon, Michel and Law, John (1997) After the Individual in Society: Lessons on Collectivity from Science, Technology and Society, in “The Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie”, 22(2), pp. 165-182.
Callon, Michel and Rabeharisoa, Vololona (2008) The Growing Engagement of Emergent Concerned Groups in Political and Economic Life: Lessons from the French Association of Neuromuscular Disease Patients, in “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, 33(2), pp. 230-261.
Charmaz, Kathy (2015) Grounded Theory: Methodology and Theory Construction, in James D. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp. 402-407.
Chasin, Alexandra (1995) Class and its Close Relations: Identities among women, servants, and machines, in Judith Halberstam and Ira Livingston, Posthuman Bodies, Bloomington, Indiana University Press, pp. 73-96.
Chevallier, Martin (2023) Staging Paro: The care of making robot(s) care, in “Social Studies of Science”, 53(5), pp. 635-659.
Cozza, Michela, Östlund, Britt and Peine, Alexander (2020) When Theory meets Practice in Entanglements of Ageing and Technology, in “Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies”, 11(2), pp. 5-11.
Dant, Tim (2005) The Driver-Car, in Mike Featherstone, Nigel Thrift and John Urry, Automobilities, London, SAGE, pp. 1-7.
Endter, Cordula (2020) User Participation as a Matter of Care: The Configuration of Older Users in the Design of Assistive Technologies, in “Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies”, 11(2), pp. 93-116.
Fischer, Björn, Östlund, Britt and Peine, Alexander (2020) Of robots and humans: Creating user representations in practice, in “Social Studies of Science”, 50(2), pp. 221-244.
Fraser, Nancy (1989) Talking about Needs: Interpretive Contests as Political Conflicts in Welfare-State Societies, in “Ethics”, 99(2), pp. 291-313.
Hall, Stuart (1997) Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices, London and Thousand Oaks, SAGE, in association with The Open University.
Haraway, Donna (1988) Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective, in “Feminist Studies”, 14(3), pp. 575-599.
Hsu, Eric L., Elliott, Anthony, Ishii, Yukari, Sawai, Atsushi and Katagiri, Masataka (2020) The development of aged care robots in Japan as a varied process, in “Technology in Society”, 63, 101366.
IEEE Spectrum (n.d.) Explore Robots. ROBOTS: Your Guide to the World of Robotics. Available at: https://robotsguide.com/robots (retrieved July 5, 2025).
Jaakola, Joni (2020) Ethics by Other Means? Care Robot Trials as Ethics-in-Practice, in “Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies”, 11(2), pp. 53-71.
Kittay, Eva Feder (2003) When Caring is Just and Justice is Caring: Justice and Mental Retardation, in Eva Feder Kittay and Ellen K. Feder, The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 257-276.
Kittay, Eva Feder and Feder, Ellen K. (2003) The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Kröger, Teppo (2009) Care research and disability studies: Nothing in common?, in “Critical Social Policy”, 29(3), pp. 398-420.
Law, John and Lin, Wen-yuan (2020) Care-ful Research: Sensibilities From STS. Available at: http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/LawLin2020CarefulResearchSensibilitiesFromSTS.pdf
(retrieved July 5, 2025).
Lechevalier, Sébastien and Laugier, Sandra (2019) Innovation Beyond Technology: Introduction, in Sébastien Lechevalier (ed.), Innovation Beyond Technology: Science for Society and Interdisciplinary Approaches, Singapore, Springer, pp. 1-21.
Lipp, Benjamin (2022) Robot Drama: Investigating Frictions between Vision and Demonstration in Care Robotics, in “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, 49(2), pp. 318-343.
Lipp, Benjamin (2023) Caring for robots: How care comes to matter in human-machine interfacing, in “Social Studies of Science”, 53(5), pp. 660-685.
Lipp, Benjamin and Peine, Alexander (2022) Ageing as a driver of progressive politics? What the European Silver Economy teaches us about the co-constitution of ageing and innovation, in “Ageing & Society”, pp. 1-13.
López Gómez, Daniel (2015) Little arrangements that matter: Rethinking autonomy-enabling innovations for later life, in “Technological Forecasting and Social Change”, 93, pp. 91-101.
Mackenzie, Catriona, Rogers, Wendy and Dodds, Susan (eds.) (2014) Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, New York, Oxford University Press.
Martin, Aryn, Myers, Natasha and Viseu, Ana (2015) The politics of care in technoscience, in “Social Studies of Science”, 45(5), pp. 625-641.
Moser, Ingunn (2003) Road traffic accidents: The ordering of subjects, bodies and disability [PhD dissertation], Oslo, Universitetet i Oslo, Unipub.
Moyle, Wendy, Beattie, Elizabeth, Draper, Brian, Shum, David, Thalib, Lukman, Jones, Cindy, O’Dwyer, Siobhan and Mervin, Cindy (2015) Effect of an interactive therapeutic robotic animal on engagement, mood states, agitation and psychotropic drug use in people with dementia: A cluster-randomized controlled trial protocol, in “Bmj Open”, 5(8), e009097.
Neven, Louis (2010) “But obviously not for me”: Robots, laboratories and the defiant identity of elder test users, in “Sociology of Health & Illness”, 32(2), pp. 335-347.
Neven, Louis and Peine, Alexander (2017) From Triple Win to Triple Sin: How a Problematic Future Discourse is Shaping the Way People Age with Technology, in “Societies”, 7(3), pp. 1-11.
Nichols, Emma, Steinmetz, Jaimie D., Vollset, Stein E., Fukutaki, Kai, Chalek, Julian, Vos, Theo et al. (2022) Estimation of the global prevalence of dementia in 2019 and forecasted prevalence in 2050: An analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019, in “The Lancet Public Health”, 7(2), e105-e125.
Nickelsen, Niels Christian Mossfeldt and Simonsen Abildgaard, Johan (2022) The entwinement of policy, design and care scripts: Providing alternative choice-dependency situations with care robots, in “Sociology of Health & Illness”, 44(2), pp. 451-468.
Oudshoorn, Nelly, Rommes, Els and Stienstra, Marcelle (2004) Configuring the User as Everybody: Gender and Design Cultures in Information and Communication Technologies, in “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, 29(1), pp. 30-63.
Oudshoorn, Nelly, Neven, Louis and Stienstra, Marcelle (2016) How diversity gets lost: Age and gender in design practices of information and communication technologies, in “Journal of Women & Aging”, 28(2), pp. 170-185.
Peine, Alexander and Moors, Ellen H. M. (2015) Valuing health technology – habilitating and prosthetic strategies in personal health systems, in “Technological Forecasting and Social Change”, 93, pp. 68-81.
Peine, Alexander and Neven, Louis (2021) The co-constitution of ageing and technology – a model and agenda, in “Ageing & Society”, 41(12), pp. 2845-2866.
Peine, Alexander, van Cooten, Vivette and Neven, Louis (2017) Rejuvenating Design: Bikes, Batteries, and Older Adopters in the Diffusion of E-bikes, in “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, 42(3), pp. 429-459.
Pickering, Michael (2001) Stereotyping: The politics of representation, London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Pols, Jeanette and Moser, Ingunn (2009) Cold technologies versus warm care? On affective and social relations with and through care technologies, in “Alter”, 3(2), pp. 159-178.
Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria (2015) Making time for soil: Technoscientific futurity and the pace of care, in “Social Studies of Science”, 45(5), pp. 691-716.
Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria (2017) Matters of care: Speculative ethics in more than human worlds, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.
Robinson, Hayley, MacDonald, Bruce, Kerse, Ngaire and Broadbent, Elizabeth (2013) The Psychosocial Effects of a Companion Robot: A Randomized Controlled Trial, in “Journal of the American Medical Directors Association”, 14(9), pp. 661-667.
Sætra, Henrik Skaug (2020) The foundations of a policy for the use of social robots in care, in “Technology in Society”, 63, 101383.
Sismondo, Sergio (2008) Science and Technology Studies and an Engaged Program, in Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, Judy Wajcman and Society for Social Studies of Science (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (Third edition), Cambridge (MA), MIT Press, pp. 13-31.
Suchman, Lucy (2009) Agencies in Technology Design: Feminist Reconfigurations, in Wendell Wallach and Peter Asaro (eds.), Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics, London and New York, Routledge, pp. 361-375.
Tamaki-Welply, Yuko (2024) Whose needs and what needs? Social robots in eldercare settings in Japan, in “Gérontologie et Société”, 46(175), pp. I-XVIII.
Tamaki-Welply, Yuko and Lechevalier, Sébastien (2024) “Social” robot and social relations in care settings: Undefined positionality and fixed temporality, in “Technology in Society”, 77, 102559.
Tøndel, Gunhild and Seibt, David (2019) Governing the Elderly Body: Technocare Policy and Industrial Promises of Freedom, in Uli Meyer, Simon Schaupp and David Seibt (eds.), Digitalization in Industry: Between Domination and Emancipation, Cham, Springer International Publishing, pp. 233-259.
Tronto, Joan (2017) There is an alternative: Homines curans and the limits of neoliberalism, in “International Journal of Care and Caring”, 1(1), pp. 27-43.
van der Velden, Maja and Mörtberg, Christina (2012) Between Need and Desire: Exploring Strategies for Gendering Design, in “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, 37(6), pp. 663-683.
van Hout, Annemarie, Pols, Jeannette and Willems, Dick (2015) Shining trinkets and unkempt gardens: On the materiality of care, in “Sociology of Health & Illness”, 37(8), pp. 1206-1217.
Varfolomeeva, Anna (2020) Care/punishment dilemma in COVID-19 hospital treatment, in “Social Anthropology/Anthropologie sociale”, 28(2), pp. 375-376.
Viseu, Ana (2015) Caring for nanotechnology? Being an integrated social scientist, in “Social Studies of Science”, 45(5), pp. 642-664.
Weber, Jutta (2005) Helpless machines and true loving care givers: A feminist critique of recent trends in human-robot interaction, in “Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society”, 3(4), pp. 209-218.
Williams, Fiona (2001) In and beyond New Labour: Towards a new political ethics of care, in “Critical Social Policy”, 21(4), pp. 467-493.
Winance, Myriam (2007) Being normally different? Changes to normalization processes: From alignment to work on the norm, in “Disability & Society”, 22, pp. 625-638.
Winance, Myriam (2010) Mobility in wheelchairs: Bodily adjustment and practical arrangements within the social and physical space, in “Politix”, 90(2), pp.115-137.
Wright, James (2020) Comparing the Development and Commercialization of Care Robots in the European Union and Japan. HAL – open science. Available at: https://hal.science/hal-02527652 (retrieved July 5, 2025).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yuko Tamaki-Welply
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
