拐杖在現代作為一種行走輔具，使用者多為老年人或行走較為不便者。基於此現象，使用拐杖被認為是老化殘疾的象徵；再加上大眾對於老化普遍抱持抗拒心態，使得多數老年人不想使用拐杖。本研究對於目前拐杖造型設計進行問卷調查分析，並且根據分析結果設計一隻拐杖，目標在於顛覆拐杖給人的刻板印象，並讓人們有使用的意願。本研究設計的拐杖目標族群為50歲以上的中年人，設計目的在於讓這年齡層的人們趁身體老化以前習慣使用拐杖。等到實際步入老年後，也會因為已經習慣使用拐杖而不會抗拒。
本研究發現目前還沒有同時被認為是現代感又熟悉的拐杖，在正式調查中發現具有某種特色的拐杖能夠給人特定的感受。根據這些發現以及前面文獻閱讀的設計建議提出兩種設計策略，並且分別各設計出一支拐杖。本研究中兩支新設計的拐杖確實相較一般拐杖讓人比較有意願使用，因此本篇研究的設計策略可以幫助拐杖具有熟悉與現代感的特性。

In modern times, canes are used as walking aids, mostly by elderly people or those
who have difficulty walking. Based on this phenomenon, using a cane is considered a symbol
of aging disability; combined with the general public's resistance to aging, many elderly
people do not want to use a cane. This research conducted a questionnaire survey on the
current design of canes, and based on the results, a cane was designed to challenge the
stereotypical impression of canes and encourage people to use it. The target population of
this study's design is middle-aged people over 50 years old, with the goal of encouraging
this age group to get used to using a cane before they age. When they actually reach old age,
they will not resist using a cane because they are already used to it.
This study found that there is currently no cane that is considered both modern and
familiar. However, it was found that a cane with certain characteristics can give people a
specific feeling. Based on these findings and previous literature studies, two design strategies
are proposed, and a cane is designed for each. The two new cane designs are evaluated in
the final study. Although they were not successful in presenting modern and familiar
characters, the participants showed more willingness to use the new design than general
canes.

Akintunde, O. O. (2011). Positive ageing: Handling misconceptions about Old-Age. Journal of General Studies, 2, 10~14.
Astell, A. J., McGrath, C., & Dove, E. (2020). ‘That's for old so and so's!’: does identity influence older adults’ technology adoption decisions? Ageing and Society, 40(7), 1550-1576. doi:10.1017/s0144686x19000230
Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2010). The Other Side of Acceptance: Studying the Direct and Indirect Effects of Emotions on Information Technology Use. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 689. doi:10.2307/25750701
Blijlevens, J., Carbon, C. C., Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. P. (2012). Aesthetic appraisal of product designs: independent effects of typicality and arousal. Br J Psychol, 103(1), 44-57. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02038.x
Bright, A. K., & Coventry, L. (2013). Assistive technology for older adults: Psychological and Socio-Emotional Design Requirements.
Brown, S., Vairis, A., Masoumifar, A. M., & Petousis, M. (2020). Common problems with the conventional design of crutches: Proposing a safer design and discussing the potential impact. Technology in Society, 60. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101215
Chang, W. C., & Van, Y. T. (2003). Researching design trends for the redesign of product form. Design Studies, 24(2), 173-180. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00033-9
Chen, K. (2020). Why do older people love and hate assistive technology? an emotional experience perspective. Ergonomics, 63(12), 1463-1474. doi:10.1080/00140139.2020.1808714
Chiung-Wei Huang, Yen-I Chiang, Chien-Lung Hsu, Yu-Hao Chuang, & Chang, C.-Y. (2016). Design and User Acceptance Evaluation of An Intelligent Electronic Navigation Crutches System for Elderly Mobile Healthcare. Paper presented at the IIAE International Conference on Industrial Application Engineering.
Cornman, J. C., Freedman, V. A., & Agree, E. M. (2005). Measurement of Assistive Device Use: Implications for Estimates of Device Use and Disability in Late Life. The Gerontologist, 45(3), 347-358. doi:10.1093/geront/45.3.347
Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., & Clarkson, P. J. (2004). Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25(6), 547-577. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2004.03.001
Desmet, P., & Dijkhuis, E. (2003, 2003). A wheelchair can be fun: A Case of Emotion-driven Design.
Dumitrescu, A. (2013). Influence of Familiarity-Novelty Ratio on Product's Aesthetic Quality. Paper presented at the Advances in Production, Automation and Transportation Systems.
Emami, R. (2009). Investigation of ergonomic issues in crutch design and present an innovation. Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Conference (APIEMS).
Fadem, M. M. a. P. (2002). Successful Aging:" A Disability Perspective. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 12, 229~235.
Frizziero, Donnici, Liverani, Alessandri, Menozzi, & Varotti. (2019). Developing Innovative Crutch Using IDeS (Industrial Design Structure) Methodology. Applied Sciences, 9(23). doi:10.3390/app9235032
Fronemann, N., Pollmann, K., Weisener, A., & Peissner, M. (2016). Happily Ever After: Positive Aging through Positive Design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.
Gramstad, A., Storli, S. L., & Hamran, T. (2013). "Do I need it? Do I really need it?" Elderly peoples experiences of unmet assistive technology device needs. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 8(4), 287-293. doi:10.3109/17483107.2012.699993
Harrington, C., & Joines, S. (2011). Assessing User Experience with Crutch Use: A Review of Literature. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 55(1), 1658-1662. doi:10.1177/1071181311551345
Hawthorn, D. (2000). Possible implications of aging for interface designers. Interacting with Computers, 12(5), 507-528. doi:10.1016/s0953-5438(99)00021-1
Hocking, C. (1999). Function or feelings: factors in abandonment of assistive devices. Technology and Disability, 11, 3-11. doi:10.3233/TAD-1999-111-202
Häggblom-Kronlöf, G., & Sonn, U. (2007). Use of assistive devices – a reality full of contradictions in elderly persons' everyday life. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 2(6), 335-345. doi:10.1080/17483100701701672
Hurd, L. C. (1999). ``WE'RE NOT OLD!'': Older Women's Negotiation of Aging and Oldness. JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES, 13, 419~439.
Kochhar, R. (2014). Attitudes About Aging: A Global Perspective. Retrieved from Pew Research Center
Kylberg, M., Löfqvist, C., Horstmann, V., & Iwarsson, S. (2013). The use of assistive devices and change in use during the ageing process among very old Swedish people. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 8(1), 58-66. doi:10.3109/17483107.2012.699585
Larsen, S. M., Mortensen, R. F., Kristensen, H. K., & Hounsgaard, L. (2019). Older adults’ perspectives on the process of becoming users of assistive technology: a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 14(2), 182-193. doi:10.1080/17483107.2018.1463403
Lu, L., Dong, J., & Sha, C. (2020). Innovative Design of Crutches for the Elderly Based on TRIZ and KANO Integrated Model. Paper presented at the 2020 International Conference on Innovation Design and Digital Technology (ICIDDT).
Mallin, S. S. V., & Carvalho, H. G. d. (2015). Assistive Technology and User-Centered Design: Emotion as Element for Innovation. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 5570-5578. doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.738
Mann, W. C., Goodall, S., Justiss, M. D., & Tomita, M. (2002). Dissatisfaction and Nonuse of Assistive Devices Among Frail Elders. Assistive Technology, 14(2), 130-139. doi:10.1080/10400435.2002.10132062
Mariëlle, C. E. H., & Jan, S. P. L. (2005). The Different Roles of Product Appearance in Consumer Choice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 63-81. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00103.x
McCreadie, C., & Tinker, A. (2005). The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing and Society, 25(01), 91-110. doi:10.1017/s0144686x0400248x
Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2012a). Newer is better! The influence of a novel appearance on the perceived performance quality of products. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(6), 469-484. doi:10.1080/09544828.2011.618802
Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2012b). Product design and apparent usability. The influence of novelty in product appearance. Applied Ergonomics, 43(6), 1081-1088. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.03.009
Nassir, S., Leong, T. W., & Robertson, T. (2015). Positive Ageing: Elements and factors for design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Australian Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction.
Nihei, M., Inoue, T., & Fujie, M. G. (2008). Psychological Influence of Wheelchairs on the Elderly Persons from Qualitative Research of Daily Living. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics, 20(4), 641-649. doi:10.20965/jrm.2008.p0641
Okuşluǧ, K. Ç. (2014). Visual attributes of products as the factors influencing users' emotional reactions: A study on dental instruments. (Master). Middle East Technical University,
Shortell, D. K., Jeff; Neely, W Lawrence; LeBlanc, Maurice. (2001). The design of a compliant composite crutch. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 38(1), 23~32.
Skymne, C., Dahlin-Ivanoff, S., Claesson, L., & Eklund, K. (2012). Getting used to assistive devices: ambivalent experiences by frail elderly persons. Scand J Occup Ther, 19(2), 194-203. doi:10.3109/11038128.2011.569757
Sugawara, A. T., Ramos, V. D., Alfieri, F. M., & Battistella, L. R. (2018). Abandonment of assistive products: assessing abandonment levels and factors that impact on it. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 13(7), 716-723. doi:10.1080/17483107.2018.1425748
Talamo, A., Giorgi, S., & Mellini, B. (2011). Designing Technologies for Ageing. Is Simplicity always a Leading Criterion? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCHI Italian Chapter International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Facing Complexity, Alghero, Italy,.
Tu, J.-C., Lin, K.-C., & Ho, Y.-R. (2016). Emotional Factors of Mobility Aids from Senior Lifestyle Standpoint. Journal of design studies, 1, 57~76.
Wan, L. (2008). Design and analysis of energy efficient crutch. (master). Northern Illinois University,
WHO. (2002). Active Ageing A Policy Framework. Genva: World Health Organization.
Zhao, R.-Q., & Chen, L.-H. (2020). Research on Interface Design for the Elderly. In (pp. 128-135): Springer International Publishing.
呂以榮. (2006). 老、中、青三代對老人刻板印象之調查－以臺南市為例. [Stereotypes of the Elderly Held by Young, Middle-Aged and the Elderly Adults]. 臺灣老人保健學刊, 2(2), 90-104. doi:10.29797/tjghr.200612.0008
施孟均, 何原璜, 許芯瑜, 許笑妮, 許文俐, & 蔡碧藍. (2016). 創新產品：多功能三合一拐杖傘. [3-in-1 multifunction umbrella cane]. 福祉科技與服務管理學刊, 4(1), 105-116. doi:10.6283/jocsg.2016.4.1.105
高旭繁, & 許淑華. (2014). 從正向心理學的觀點看台灣初老期民眾的老化調適. [Aging Adjustment of Young-olds in Taiwan: A Positive Psychology Perspective]. 應用心理研究, 60, 115-159.
曾明基, 徐志榮, 葉采青, 李淑貞, & 黃炳勳. (2004). 手杖設計與使用之初探. [The Design and Usage of Cane: A Preliminary Report]. 物理治療, 29(1), 54-60.