| 1. |
- Davis, Meredith, et al.
(författare)
-
Responding to the Indeterminacy of Doctoral Research in Design
- 2023
-
Ingår i: She Ji. - : Elsevier. - 2405-8726. ; 9:2, s. 283-307
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The Future of Design Education working group on doctoral education included doctoral supervisors from nine programs around the world and addressed the indeterminacy of standards for the PhD in Design. Internationally, “contributions to knowledge” under the PhD degree title range from evidence-based investigations documented in a dissertation to personal reflections on making artifacts. In some programs, quantitative and qualitative research methods are taught; in others, there is no instruction in methods. The working group suggested that reflection on one’s own creative production is the role of the professional master’s degree and recommended standards for two doctoral programs—the PhD and the Doctor of Design (DDes). The group defined the PhD as addressing unresolved problems with the goal of generalizable knowledge or theory for the field. It described the DDes as a professional practice degree in which research is done in a practice setting to frame a specific opportunity space, guide in-process design decisions, or evaluate outcomes. DDes findings do not claim generalizability and result in “cases.” The working group discussed methods, sampling, standards of evidence and claims, ethics, research writing, and program management.
|
|
| 2. |
- Strömberg, Helena, 1985, et al.
(författare)
-
Enacting metaphors to explore relations and interactions with automated driving systems
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Design Studies. - : Elsevier BV. - 0142-694X. ; 67, s. 77-101
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Conventional interaction design methodologies cannot fully encompass the redefined relationships between humans and increasingly intelligent technology. New methods are necessary to address interaction at early stages in the design process. Both design metaphors and enactment techniques have been suggested, and this paper explores whether a combination of these can support the design of future interactions. Across three workshops, 27 participants utilised the combination to design the interaction with an automated driving system. Analysis shows that the method combination supported imagining and designing; metaphors aided the creation of a joint conceptual vision of the relationship, and the enactment created tangible experiences and contextualisation of the design concepts. Jointly the methods brought together multi-disciplinary teams in a shared vision, by acting as a shared language and enacted representations of insights that could be engaged with and experienced together.
|
|
