Design Studies最新文献

This research note addresses the formulation of questions in design research. On the premise that well formulated research questions have far-reaching implications for other aspects of the development and impact of research, articulating quality research questions is an issue of the highest concern. In this note we propose a framework for the formulation of research questions, adapted from clinical research and tailored to empirical design research. The framework, RIN. AFE, pertains to criteria for effective research questions: on the substance side, Relevant, Interesting and Novel; on the methodological execution side, Appropriate, Feasible and Ethical. The application of this framework is demonstrated through an analysis of an award-winning Design Studies paper.

There is no consensus on how to judge the quality of Research Through Design (RTD) projects, which makes them difficult to plan and evaluate. In response, this study provides a framework for discussing and positioning RTD projects in terms of quality. It draws on theory on research quality and an original analysis of 25 RTD papers to identify how known quality indicators are applied. Our findings show that most papers align with these indicators, especially those associated with pragmatist research. Nonetheless, there are opportunities to enrich discussions on quality in RTD and we propose recommendations to this end. These recommendations can support more mindful and transparent project planning and reporting, and better assessment of and discussions on quality.

To attain a better grasp of the dynamics underlying the creative process, it is necessary to take the ‘context’ of ideation into account. The contexts that accompany creative ideation differ considerably both across and within domains. Within the realms of artistic creativities, which are closely allied to design creativities, contextual factors include (a) the temporal duration of the creative process, (b) degree of isolation/sociality involved across all stages of the creative process from the inception of the idea to the reception of the artwork, and (c) the inherent voluntary/involuntary nature of the accessibility of the artwork. Considering the importance of the context of creative ideation is therefore essential to arrive at a comprehensive and accurate understanding of creativities in practice.

The design community traditionally excels at multidisciplinary research efforts, integrating work from social science, engineering, computer science, and other disciplines. Simultaneously, design is also developing as a discipline in its own right. In order to balance a multidisciplinary¹ tradition against consolidation around a core set of disciplinary foundations, the design community must make intentional decisions about engaging in multidisciplinary research. Towards this end, we propose the Degrees of Disciplinarity Framework, a lingua franca for describing varying relationships between disciplines in a given research effort. We also introduce research archetypes in relation to this conceptual framework and provide examples of the framework using agent-based modeling research in design. Further, we discuss implications of this framework for the education of future design practitioners and researchers.

The psychological term affective quality denotes the ability of objects to change how individuals feel when they encounter those objects. In design research, the affective qualities of inspirational materials and the perception of such affective qualities have been studied, mainly from a positivist standpoint. This involves experimental methodologies and tools like rating scales which imply objective measurements of perception of affective qualities to establish cause-effect relationships. However, affective quality is enmeshed in cultural and contextual frameworks. This implies that there can be subjective perceptions of affective quality that demand more descriptive research. This paper contextualises a descriptive phenomeological approach to study designers’ subjective perceptions of affective qualities of inspirational material. This approach fosters methodological diversity and theory-building research in design.

How a research team defines their study sample can be decisive in shaping impact on both practice and theory. However, sampling in design research faces several major challenges, including diverse terminology, limited prior literature, and lack of common framework for discussing sampling decisions. We address these challenges by bringing together guidance from across related research fields as well as cross-referring to examples from published design research. We offer a structured process for sample development and present eight key sampling considerations. The paper contributes to research method selection, development, and use, as well as extending discussions surrounding knowledge construction, standards of reporting, and design research impact.

Design methods have been integral to design studies research, with initial goals of bringing rationality and objectivity to design activities, later shifting to the creation and provision of methods as tools to encourage more reflective, meaningful, and socially responsible design practices. However, little research exists that describes how methods are created, what knowledge is used to inform this creation, or connects elements of methods to performance by designers. In this research note, I describe performative, codification-oriented, and presentation-oriented stances towards design methods, articulating a vocabulary that languages aspects of methods. I describe areas where this vocabulary may support design researchers, including building new design methods, informing descriptive accounts of methods in use, and supporting the creation of a theory of method.