当代参与式设计中的设计师:实践与议程

IF 0.2 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI:10.33965/ijcsis_2019140106
Bernardo Alves Villarinho Lima, L. Almeida
{"title":"当代参与式设计中的设计师:实践与议程","authors":"Bernardo Alves Villarinho Lima, L. Almeida","doi":"10.33965/ijcsis_2019140106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last four decades, Participatory Design (PD) gained traction in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) communities around the world. The approach presents alternatives in attempts to design with persons, and not only for them, in the form of techniques and design practices. Many contemporary PD researchers seek to turn the approach towards designing for democracy and empowerment of partner groups, contrary to PD practices which simply focus on the production of artifacts. Countering technocratic trends, researchers around the world seek to revitalize the discipline by proposing and promoting alternative research agendas, towards a critical and politically engaged discipline. Designers present themselves as actors and actresses in these processes, and understanding how they operate can inform future work on how design practices can promote empowerment despite the power gap between partners and designers. Perspectives from Science, Technology and Society (STS) studies informs critical theories to approach thinking of the designer’s role, agency, and responsibilities that go beyond the production of artifacts, including ethical, political, and technological concerns, the last one being comprehended in a non-deterministic way and encompass activities beyond the design of artifacts. This paper explores works from the 2018 Participatory Design Conference (PDC), seeking state-of-the-art on how researchers perceive themselves in their practices, using STS studies and Cr, and proposes a set of suggestions on how to plan situated participation.","PeriodicalId":41878,"journal":{"name":"IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DESIGNERS IN CONTEMPORARY PARTICIPATORY DESIGN: PRACTICES AND AGENDAS\",\"authors\":\"Bernardo Alves Villarinho Lima, L. Almeida\",\"doi\":\"10.33965/ijcsis_2019140106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the last four decades, Participatory Design (PD) gained traction in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) communities around the world. The approach presents alternatives in attempts to design with persons, and not only for them, in the form of techniques and design practices. Many contemporary PD researchers seek to turn the approach towards designing for democracy and empowerment of partner groups, contrary to PD practices which simply focus on the production of artifacts. Countering technocratic trends, researchers around the world seek to revitalize the discipline by proposing and promoting alternative research agendas, towards a critical and politically engaged discipline. Designers present themselves as actors and actresses in these processes, and understanding how they operate can inform future work on how design practices can promote empowerment despite the power gap between partners and designers. Perspectives from Science, Technology and Society (STS) studies informs critical theories to approach thinking of the designer’s role, agency, and responsibilities that go beyond the production of artifacts, including ethical, political, and technological concerns, the last one being comprehended in a non-deterministic way and encompass activities beyond the design of artifacts. This paper explores works from the 2018 Participatory Design Conference (PDC), seeking state-of-the-art on how researchers perceive themselves in their practices, using STS studies and Cr, and proposes a set of suggestions on how to plan situated participation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41878,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33965/ijcsis_2019140106\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33965/ijcsis_2019140106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在过去的四十年中,参与式设计(PD)在世界各地的人机交互(HCI)社区中获得了牵引力。该方法以技术和设计实践的形式呈现了与人一起设计的替代方案,而不仅仅是为他们设计。许多当代PD研究人员试图将方法转向为合作伙伴群体的民主和授权而设计,与PD实践相反,PD实践只关注人工制品的生产。为了对抗技术官僚主义的趋势,世界各地的研究人员试图通过提出和促进替代研究议程来振兴这一学科,朝着批评性和政治性的学科发展。设计师将自己呈现为这些过程中的演员,了解他们的运作方式可以为未来的工作提供信息,了解设计实践如何促进授权,尽管合作伙伴和设计师之间存在权力差距。来自科学、技术和社会(STS)研究的观点为批判性理论提供了信息,以接近设计师的角色、代理和责任,这些角色、代理和责任超越了人工制品的生产,包括道德、政治和技术问题,最后一个以非确定性的方式被理解,并包括人工制品设计之外的活动。本文探讨了2018年参与式设计大会(PDC)的作品,利用STS研究和Cr,寻求研究人员在实践中如何看待自己的最新技术,并就如何规划情境参与提出了一系列建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
DESIGNERS IN CONTEMPORARY PARTICIPATORY DESIGN: PRACTICES AND AGENDAS
Over the last four decades, Participatory Design (PD) gained traction in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) communities around the world. The approach presents alternatives in attempts to design with persons, and not only for them, in the form of techniques and design practices. Many contemporary PD researchers seek to turn the approach towards designing for democracy and empowerment of partner groups, contrary to PD practices which simply focus on the production of artifacts. Countering technocratic trends, researchers around the world seek to revitalize the discipline by proposing and promoting alternative research agendas, towards a critical and politically engaged discipline. Designers present themselves as actors and actresses in these processes, and understanding how they operate can inform future work on how design practices can promote empowerment despite the power gap between partners and designers. Perspectives from Science, Technology and Society (STS) studies informs critical theories to approach thinking of the designer’s role, agency, and responsibilities that go beyond the production of artifacts, including ethical, political, and technological concerns, the last one being comprehended in a non-deterministic way and encompass activities beyond the design of artifacts. This paper explores works from the 2018 Participatory Design Conference (PDC), seeking state-of-the-art on how researchers perceive themselves in their practices, using STS studies and Cr, and proposes a set of suggestions on how to plan situated participation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems
IADIS-International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ESTIMATION OF VARIOUS HUMAN EMOTIONS USING LIGHTWEIGHT FNIRS DEVICE CONSISTENT GAMING SKILL DEMOGRAPHICS IN ACADEMIC RESEARCH STATE OF GENDER EQUALITY IN AND BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE A HYBRID DILATION APPROACH FOR REMOTE SENSING SCENE IMAGE CLASSIFICATION CLINICAL PATHWAYS AND THE NEED FOR SYSTEM INTEGRATION
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1